:disgust;

I'm exporting CSS layers and Fireworks slices as the source. There is a hot
spot covering a sliced image. The hotspot has a URL tied to the properties of
the hotspot. But no HREFs in HTML.

So, I tried no hotspot but URLs tied to the properties of each slice I want
hot. Again, no href's written into the HTML

Add them in Dreamweaver? Is this just a mockup you're making?

Joey,
I know I can add them in Dreamweaver, why are they not being written to the
Fireworks HTML? In the browser preview they are. The preview uses tables.
You are implying there is a bug. I miss Image Ready

Montemedia wrote:
> Joey,
> I know I can add them in Dreamweaver, why are they not being written to the
> Fireworks HTML? In the browser preview they are. The preview uses tables.
> You are implying there is a bug. I miss Image Ready
>

There is no bug. I do interactive click throughs all the time using FW.
I just marked an assignment from a group of 18 students who did the same
thing, each one successful.

Provide a file so we can more accurately diagnose what the problem is.
Otherwise, we're all just guessing.

--
Jim Babbage - .:Community MX:. & .:Adobe Community Expert:.
http://www.communityMX.com/
CommunityMX - Free Resources:
http://www.communitymx.com/free.cfm
---
.:Adobe Community Expert for Fireworks:.
Adobe Community Expert
http://tinyurl.com/2a7dyp
---
See my work on Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jim_babbage/

.... the Fireworks PNG file is here: http://www.montemedia.net/Other/splash.zip
---- the preview writes tables into the HTML along with the proper HREF (#).
The hotspot is actually "hot". I want to export CSS, Fireworks slices as the
source, and have it write Dreamweaver XHTML with ".html" as the prefered
extension.

When I export the file as described above, no HREF is written, at all - just
the the CSS and proper layout. Maybe there is an extension missing, or
something that writes the CSS? Is that possible?

There's a lot of things setup poorly with this, but I assume you're trying to
build something other than a production website right? At least in HTML you
cant have a single hotspot span across multiple images. Hotspots have been
deprecated from XHTML anyway, so why bother trying this in xhtml/css in the
first place?

If you're trying to have the entire image link to the same URL via the
hotspot, why do you have it broken into so many pieces?

Nice painting by the way, I did a double-take when I finally saw the eyes ;-)

.... Joey, I don't know what ya mean by a "production" website. I'm building a
brocure style website for an artist. The file is just a simple splash page.

I know not to span hotspots across multiple slices, and all that. I've
attached URLs to individual slices, no slices - you name it, I've tried it.
That is not the issue. The issue is, why is Fireworks not writing any HREF
code, at all - none - zero - nada! It will write it just fine for a preview in
the browser, but exporting the file results in absolutely no HREF in the HTML.

What am I overlooking?

Due to the intricate nature of that painting, you're going to have to live with
a higher file size (I got it down to 75k by turning off sharpen color edges and
turning down the compression to 80). Cutting it up into 20 or more chunks like
that just adds a bunch of markup. Hell, how many dial-up users buy art anyway?

As to why it doesn't add the HREFs: I'll be the first to admit I'm not 100%
sure, mostly due to the fact I use Fireworks to make graphics exclusively.
Though I have heard of other people having issues with Fireworks stripping URLS
from exported slices.

Jim & Linda can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the
assumption that the HTML/CSS output in Fireworks was for prototyping web
mockups, not for creating production HTML.

If I was trying to make that splash page of yours work I would just take that
solid image, all 80-100K of it, export it out as a single JPEG, insert it into
the page in Dreamweaver, and set a simple HREF to the page I wanted to link to.
I'm not sure why you're using hotspots at all? If you want to have only the
name/logo at the top link, just draw the hotspot on via Dreamweaver.

The concept of intro pages is widely considered outdated, and unfriendly to
the user these days anyway. The best solution would be to take the user right
to the content they're looking for anyway ;-)

JoeyD1978 wrote:
> Due to the intricate nature of that painting, you're going to have to live with
> a higher file size (I got it down to 75k by turning off sharpen color edges and
> turning down the compression to 80). Cutting it up into 20 or more chunks like
> that just adds a bunch of markup. Hell, how many dial-up users buy art anyway?
>
> As to why it doesn't add the HREFs: I'll be the first to admit I'm not 100%
> sure, mostly due to the fact I use Fireworks to make graphics exclusively.
> Though I have heard of other people having issues with Fireworks stripping URLS
> from exported slices.
>
> Jim & Linda can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the
> assumption that the HTML/CSS output in Fireworks was for prototyping web
> mockups, not for creating production HTML.
>
> If I was trying to make that splash page of yours work I would just take that
> solid image, all 80-100K of it, export it out as a single JPEG, insert it into
> the page in Dreamweaver, and set a simple HREF to the page I wanted to link to.
> I'm not sure why you're using hotspots at all? If you want to have only the
> name/logo at the top link, just draw the hotspot on via Dreamweaver.
>
> The concept of intro pages is widely considered outdated, and unfriendly to
> the user these days anyway. The best solution would be to take the user right
> to the content they're looking for anyway ;-)
>
>

I haven't had a chance to look at the file yet but, yes, at the moment I
only use FW html for click through mock ups because it's fast. When the
design and flow get approved, I do my graphic work in FW and my xhtml in
DW.

The rest of what Joey says makes complete sense too, but if I have
anything to add after I review the file, I will chime in.

--
Jim Babbage - .:Community MX:. & .:Adobe Community Expert:.
http://www.communityMX.com/
CommunityMX - Free Resources:
http://www.communitymx.com/free.cfm
---
.:Adobe Community Expert for Fireworks:.
Adobe Community Expert
http://tinyurl.com/2a7dyp
---
See my work on Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jim_babbage/

.... Joey, you are right on all fronts. I tried to talk my client out of a
splash page. She wants one and I've gone head-to-head on so many fronts now, I
gave in.

What you are saying is, Fireworks is full of bugs. It can't write proper HTML
- even though it has tools to do so, and is advertised and sold as having those
capabilities.

Right?

Montemedia wrote:
> ... Joey, I don't know what ya mean by a "production" website. I'm building a
> brocure style website for an artist. The file is just a simple splash page.
>
> I know not to span hotspots across multiple slices, and all that. I've
> attached URLs to individual slices, no slices - you name it, I've tried it.
> That is not the issue. The issue is, why is Fireworks not writing any HREF
> code, at all - none - zero - nada! It will write it just fine for a preview in
> the browser, but exporting the file results in absolutely no HREF in the HTML.
>
> What am I overlooking?
>
>
>
OK I just opened the file and there is NO url in the link box for the
hotspot.

As far as I can tell, there is no reason to slice up this image in the
manner shown. You're creating overly complex css.

Even with a url,the Image map is not working because your images are
being linked as background images within each div (at least that was
what happened when I did the export). Image maps cannot be applied to
background images, so it's being ignored in the export. If I export as
html and images (assuming a url is added to the hotspot) it works as
expected (although I would resize the hotspot to one slice as the
resulting image map is HUGE).

If you really want to slice this file up in this manner, delete the
hotspot and attach the link to the slice(s). It will *work* then because
the images will be inserted inline in the divs, rather than as
background images, but I don't recommend it.

I'd just make a single jpeg file and experiment with compression, as
Joey did, and use the graphic as the single link you need.

HTH


Jim Babbage - .:Community MX:. & .:Adobe Community Expert:.
http://www.communityMX.com/
CommunityMX - Free Resources:
http://www.communitymx.com/free.cfm
---
.:Adobe Community Expert for Fireworks:.
Adobe Community Expert
http://tinyurl.com/2a7dyp
---
See my work on Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jim_babbage/

Montemedia wrote:
> What you are saying is, Fireworks is full of bugs.

No. What they are saying is that you are misusing it to create
production code. Fireworks is a graphics application, not a Web
authoring application. FW is fine for creating HTML prototypes but most
pros using it do not rely on the code it exports for use in a final site
and for good reason (whatever Adobe's hype may be).

This is NOT an inherent flaw in Fireworks but just the fact that *any*
purely graphic/image editing application (FW, Photoshop, Illustrator) is
completely the wrong tool to create a final site's code because the
process of visually designing a Web site UI and the process of
developing lean, efficient and semantic HTML code that truly reflects
the logical structure of the content are very different kinds of
processes. The latter is better done in a dedicated Web authoring tool
like Dreamweaver where you have complete control over what will be a
header, a paragraph, a list or whatever.

> It can't write proper HTML
> - even though it has tools to do so, and is advertised and sold as having those
> capabilities.
>
> Right?

Wrong. Fireworks is marketed as a "rapid prototyping" application. Here
what appears on the main Fireworks product page:

"Rapidly prototype and design for the web
Accelerate web design and development with Adobe® Fireworks® CS3
software, the ideal tool for creating and optimizing images for the web
and rapidly prototyping websites."

http://www.adobe.com/products/fireworks/

No where does it say it will create a complete and final site for you.
WYSIWYG is an illusion on the Web and anyone promising it for a graphic
or 100% visual app is lying (Adobe makes no such promises that I can
see... Macromedia certainly didn't).

The Web is a very different medium than print and the design process (or
at least the part when your create final end user files) is also
different. As stated on the product page above, Fireworks' core purpose
is to create and optimize Web GRAPHICS and PROTOTYPING Web sites. When
you export an EPS file or PDF from InDesign or Illustrator for printing,
you don't need to worry about the underlying code in the file. If you
did your job right in ID or AI, the file will print fine. The Web is a
completely different kind of medium and requires that you do understand
and care about the underlying code because it can make or break your
site in search engines, make your site inaccessible to some users and
things like that. Anyone thinking they can create an effective Web site
100% visually without ever touching HTML or CSS code is seriously
delusional... It's the nature of the medium.

--
Stéphane Bergeron
reach : connect : communicate
http://www.webfocusdesign.com
blog : tutorials : articles : gallery
http://www.pixelyzed.com

Jim wrote: "... OK I just opened the file and there is NO url in the link box
for the
hotspot."

Monte says: "Yes there is, it's '#'." - the traditional, placeholder URL.

Jim wrote: "As far as I can tell, there is no reason to slice up this image in
the manner shown. You're creating overly complex css."

Monte says: "The server really doesn't care how complex the code is as long as
it is correct. And slicing images is a method of optimizing the download of a
high quality JPEG image. And if it isn't, why are there slicing tools, at all?
And really, that isn't the point of this discussion. I'm asking for a reason
why Fireworks is not writing any link information in the code.

I've attached URLs to slices - I'VE TRIED EVERYTHING I AM ASKING THE ADOBE
PROS, WHY ISN'T FIREWORKS WRITING ANY XHTML FOR LINKS? IT IS SUPPOSED
TO! IT KNOWS WHAT TO WRITE FOR THE FREAK'N' BROWSER PREVIEW. AM I MISSING
SOMETHING? That?s what I want to know. I don't want Web design lessons.
Maybe some other time I?ll let you make fun of my Web pages.

And Now, One of My Special Comments ? Because Adobe Has It
Coming:

I NEVER HAD A PROBLEM WITH ANYTHING LIKE THIS UNTIL ADOBE DECIDES THAT I
SHOULD START USING FIREWORKS, INSTEAD OF IMAGE READY - AND DREAMWEAVER INSTEAD
OF GO LIVE. THE INTERFACES ARE NOT THE SAME AS OTHER ADOBE APPLICATIONS. THEY
ARE LIKE ? DO NOT BEHAVE, OR TREAT TEXT, OR DO ... THEY S*CK. AS LONG AS I'VE
BEEN DESIGNING COMPUTER MULTIMEDIA (professionally since 1998), IF I EVER
WANTED TO USE MACROMEDIA APPLICATIONS, I WOULD HAVE PURCHASED THEM WHEN THEY
WERE PUBLISHED BY MACROMEDIA. I EVEN CHOSE TO USE LIVE MOTION AFTER LEARNING
FLASH ? THAT IS HOW MUCH AN ADOBE FAN I AM ? I TRUSTED THE COMPANY. THEY HAVE
ALWAYS KNOWN HOW TO DESIGN AN APPLICATION FOR THOSE OF US COMING FROM OTHER
DISCIPLINES ? LIKE TRADITIONAL FINE ART & GRAPHICS, THE MUSIC BUSINESS, ETC. ?

ADOBE SHOULD HAVE GIVEN THEIR LOYAL CUSTOMERS A CHOICE, IN PURCHASING THE CS3
WEB PREMIUM SUITE, GO LIVE or DREAMWEAVER - IMAGE READY or FIREWORKS.

What Adobe has effectively done to me, professionally speaking, has made it
harder for me to get my work done. My clients are waiting. I'm scratching my
head as to what's going on. It frustrates me so that I am really angry at
Adobe for screwing me around.

I was familiar, and fast, and competent using a combination of Photoshop,
Image Ready, and Go Live to create beautiful, elaborate, complicated,
brochure-style websites - exclusively for photographers and artists. I trusted
that when the CS3 suites were released it would, at the very least, be the
reliable, business as usual ? but a little newer and better ? maybe some new,
usable features. But the substitution of Dreamweaver for GoLive and Fireworks
for Image Ready was wrong, on many levels.

Adobe took advantage of my trust, my faith in them but substituting a familiar
interface, a familiar program, with clunky, unintuitive applications developed
by their former rival, Macromedia. The very same applications I've avoided -
for years. I tried those years ago ? I hated them. I tried those applications
and made the decision to stick with Adobe applications because I'm already
familiar with the look and feel - and appreciate the solid integration between
applications. Much of that is out-the-window, now - for me, that is.

So, now I am left with suspicion and doubt of Adobe. I wonder which
application is Adobe going to keep - Go Live or Dreamweaver? I can?t tell, I
read between the lines and it is still vague. I used to use Go Live, but Adobe
tricked me into using Dreamweaver - because that is what was included in the
CS3 Web Premium Suite. I, typically trusting of Adobe, assumed Go Live went
belly-up. But no, Adobe tricked me. They waited until I was deeply invested
in CS3 before they announced the release of Go Live 9 ? but they didn?t call it
Go Live CS3 ? why? What the f*ck is going on?

Why was Image Ready scratched? I loved it and used it - a lot! Fireworks -
IS SO UNINTUITIVE and clunky and sticky and I HATE THE WAY IT WORKS WITH TEXT
and it hangs, and all kinds of sticky, clunky, what-just-happened kind of
performance. I am so frustrated, I could cry.

So, back to business, NOT ONE PERSON CAN ANSWER MY QUESTION AS TO WHY THERE
IS NO HREFs IN THE EXPORT HTML.

Jim, I know you to be an expert. But as I read your response, I have no idea
where you are coming from. URLs being linked as/to background images, I have
no idea how that can happen - where the switch is, the setting, the menu, the
preference, the trigger to pull that will just blow my head off.

And really, the size of an image map doesn't matter. A server doesn't
give a flying-flip - it's just coordinates. To click an image linking the user
to a new page is very commonplace. And it doesn't matter how big the image is.

So aside from how lousy everyone thinks I am as a Web designer (and I really
don't care). What is wrong when a preview is right and the exported file is
wrong? The file I made was for illustration purposes. If you think you know
what you are talking about, correct the file, send me a download, I?ll export
the HTML and images from within my f*ck?n? Fireworks app, and see what happens.

Montemedia wrote:
>>If you think you know what you are talking about, correct the file,
send me a download, I?ll export the HTML and images from within my
f*ck?n? Fireworks app, and see what happens.<<

Upload your own exported code to a server where it can be looked at, if
you wish.

I'm sure someone else will be happy to you.


Montemedia wrote:
> Jim wrote: "... OK I just opened the file and there is NO url in the link box
> for the
> hotspot."
>
> Monte says: "Yes there is, it's '#'." - the traditional, placeholder URL.
>
> Jim wrote: "As far as I can tell, there is no reason to slice up this image in
> the manner shown. You're creating overly complex css."
>
> Monte says: "The server really doesn't care how complex the code is as long as
> it is correct. And slicing images is a method of optimizing the download of a
> high quality JPEG image. And if it isn't, why are there slicing tools, at all?
> And really, that isn't the point of this discussion. I'm asking for a reason
> why Fireworks is not writing any link information in the code.
>
> I've attached URLs to slices - I'VE TRIED EVERYTHING I AM ASKING THE ADOBE
> PROS, WHY ISN'T FIREWORKS WRITING ANY XHTML FOR LINKS? IT IS SUPPOSED
> TO! IT KNOWS WHAT TO WRITE FOR THE FREAK'N' BROWSER PREVIEW. AM I MISSING
> SOMETHING? That?s what I want to know. I don't want Web design lessons.
> Maybe some other time I?ll let you make fun of my Web pages.
>
> And Now, One of My Special Comments ? Because Adobe Has It
> Coming:
>
> I NEVER HAD A PROBLEM WITH ANYTHING LIKE THIS UNTIL ADOBE DECIDES THAT I
> SHOULD START USING FIREWORKS, INSTEAD OF IMAGE READY - AND DREAMWEAVER INSTEAD
> OF GO LIVE. THE INTERFACES ARE NOT THE SAME AS OTHER ADOBE APPLICATIONS. THEY
> ARE LIKE ? DO NOT BEHAVE, OR TREAT TEXT, OR DO ... THEY S*CK. AS LONG AS I'VE
> BEEN DESIGNING COMPUTER MULTIMEDIA (professionally since 1998), IF I EVER
> WANTED TO USE MACROMEDIA APPLICATIONS, I WOULD HAVE PURCHASED THEM WHEN THEY
> WERE PUBLISHED BY MACROMEDIA. I EVEN CHOSE TO USE LIVE MOTION AFTER LEARNING
> FLASH ? THAT IS HOW MUCH AN ADOBE FAN I AM ? I TRUSTED THE COMPANY. THEY HAVE
> ALWAYS KNOWN HOW TO DESIGN AN APPLICATION FOR THOSE OF US COMING FROM OTHER
> DISCIPLINES ? LIKE TRADITIONAL FINE ART & GRAPHICS, THE MUSIC BUSINESS, ETC. ?
>
> ADOBE SHOULD HAVE GIVEN THEIR LOYAL CUSTOMERS A CHOICE, IN PURCHASING THE CS3
> WEB PREMIUM SUITE, GO LIVE or DREAMWEAVER - IMAGE READY or FIREWORKS.
>
> What Adobe has effectively done to me, professionally speaking, has made it
> harder for me to get my work done. My clients are waiting. I'm scratching my
> head as to what's going on. It frustrates me so that I am really angry at
> Adobe for screwing me around.
>
> I was familiar, and fast, and competent using a combination of Photoshop,
> Image Ready, and Go Live to create beautiful, elaborate, complicated,
> brochure-style websites - exclusively for photographers and artists. I trusted
> that when the CS3 suites were released it would, at the very least, be the
> reliable, business as usual ? but a little newer and better ? maybe some new,
> usable features. But the substitution of Dreamweaver for GoLive and Fireworks
> for Image Ready was wrong, on many levels.
>
> Adobe took advantage of my trust, my faith in them but substituting a familiar
> interface, a familiar program, with clunky, unintuitive applications developed
> by their former rival, Macromedia. The very same applications I've avoided -
> for years. I tried those years ago ? I hated them. I tried those applications
> and made the decision to stick with Adobe applications because I'm already
> familiar with the look and feel - and appreciate the solid integration between
> applications. Much of that is out-the-window, now - for me, that is.
>
> So, now I am left with suspicion and doubt of Adobe. I wonder which
> application is Adobe going to keep - Go Live or Dreamweaver? I can?t tell, I
> read between the lines and it is still vague. I used to use Go Live, but Adobe
> tricked me into using Dreamweaver - because that is what was included in the
> CS3 Web Premium Suite. I, typically trusting of Adobe, assumed Go Live went
> belly-up. But no, Adobe tricked me. They waited until I was deeply invested
> in CS3 before they announced the release of Go Live 9 ? but they didn?t call it
> Go Live CS3 ? why? What the f*ck is going on?
>
> Why was Image Ready scratched? I loved it and used it - a lot! Fireworks -
> IS SO UNINTUITIVE and clunky and sticky and I HATE THE WAY IT WORKS WITH TEXT
> and it hangs, and all kinds of sticky, clunky, what-just-happened kind of
> performance. I am so frustrated, I could cry.
>
> So, back to business, NOT ONE PERSON CAN ANSWER MY QUESTION AS TO WHY THERE
> IS NO HREFs IN THE EXPORT HTML.
>
> Jim, I know you to be an expert. But as I read your response, I have no idea
> where you are coming from. URLs being linked as/to background images, I have
> no idea how that can happen - where the switch is, the setting, the menu, the
> preference, the trigger to pull that will just blow my head off.
>
> And really, the size of an image map doesn't matter. A server doesn't
> give a flying-flip - it's just coordinates. To click an image linking the user
> to a new page is very commonplace. And it doesn't matter how big the image is.
>
> So aside from how lousy everyone thinks I am as a Web designer (and I really
> don't care). What is wrong when a preview is right and the exported file is
> wrong? The file I made was for illustration purposes. If you think you know
> what you are talking about, correct the file, send me a download, I?ll export
> the HTML and images from within my f*ck?n? Fireworks app, and see what happens.
>


--
Jim Babbage - .:Community MX:. & .:Adobe Community Expert:.
http://www.communityMX.com/
CommunityMX - Free Resources:
http://www.communitymx.com/free.cfm
---
.:Adobe Community Expert for Fireworks:.
Adobe Community Expert
http://tinyurl.com/2a7dyp
---
See my work on Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jim_babbage/

Jim said: Upload your own exported code to a server where it can be looked at, if you wish ... I'm sure someone else will be happy to you.

Monte says: That's not ful, at all.

Montemedia wrote:
> Jim said: Upload your own exported code to a server where it can be looked at, if you wish ... I'm sure someone else will be happy to you.
>
> Monte says: That's not ful, at all.
>

No one else who is posting seems to be having your problem. Hence the
suggestion for you to upload YOUR code.

And apparently I don't know what I'm doing so it's rather pointless for
me to continue trying to . As I said, I am sure some one else will
be happy to give you a hand.

I wish you well.

--
Jim Babbage - .:Community MX:. & .:Adobe Community Expert:.
http://www.communityMX.com/
CommunityMX - Free Resources:
http://www.communitymx.com/free.cfm
---
.:Adobe Community Expert for Fireworks:.
Adobe Community Expert
http://tinyurl.com/2a7dyp
---
See my work on Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jim_babbage/

I uploaded the file. I asked for someone to export the HTML from their computer and see if the links were stripped.

Ok Monte,

I set up a brand new file, and then added some slices. To one of the slices I
added a link to http://google.com. I Then exported it as HTML & Images, and
then looked over the code it produced and found that my link to Google was
indeed still there.

I then changed the export option to CSS Layers, and checked the code again.
The HREF to google was completely gone. Is it a bug, or some kind of oversight
on Adobe's part? I have no idea quite frankly, but who cares either way? The
code that it does produces doesn't even include a doctype in the header, but
does include interesting little tidbits like "<!-- saved from
url=(0014)about:internet -->" and "<meta name="description" content="FW MX CSS
Layer">". This would lead me to believe that the code was prepared in a manner
for uses other than PRODUCTION CODE.

Everyone here knows you miss Imageready and find Fireworks an unacceptable
replacement. I feel bad for you, as it would completely destroy how I work if I
had to switch to something other than my preferred platform. However what
myself and some others are trying to point out, is that you're completely
missing the point how how Fireworks fits into a web design workflow.

If you have any specific questions about Fireworks I promise that I'll do
everything I can to you, as will a lot of others here too. But as far as I
can tell, there's no remedy to the issue you're having. I suggest you file a
bug report with Adobe, or bring it to the attention of their support department.

Thank you Joey! Thank you very, very much.
At least I'm not crazy. And when I get a minute, I will file a bug report -
because it is a "bug" and I'm not going to spend another minute of my time
trying to figure out what I'm doing wrong.

If I have another question about anything, I'm coming to you. Aren't you
lucky?

Montemedia wrote:
> Thank you Joey! Thank you very, very much.
> At least I'm not crazy. And when I get a minute, I will file a bug report -
> because it is a "bug" and I'm not going to spend another minute of my time
> trying to figure out what I'm doing wrong.
>
> If I have another question about anything, I'm coming to you. Aren't you
> lucky?
>
>
Why would it be a bug for Fireworks to do what you are telling it?

css = style

html = structure

You can write all the css you want and it will never have an href or hot
spot in it. Why should Fireworks export one?

SKB

SKB half awake said: "... Why would it be a bug for Fireworks to do what you
are telling it? ... css = style ... html = structure. You can write all the
css you want and it will never have an href or hot spot in it. Why should
Fireworks export one? SKB

Monte, knowing his circumstance clarified replies: " Excuse me?"

Montemedia wrote:
> SKB half awake said: "... Why would it be a bug for Fireworks to do what you
> are telling it? ... css = style ... html = structure. You can write all the
> css you want and it will never have an href or hot spot in it. Why should
> Fireworks export one? SKB
>
> Monte, knowing his circumstance clarified replies: " Excuse me?"
>
>



Here is a link to a css style sheet from a fairly large company.
http://welcome.hp-ww.com/country/us/...eb_welcome.css

This is the html page that it is attached to.
http://www.hp.com/country/us/en/welcomeBC.html
There are lots of links. View the source html code and you will see many
href's.

Search the css style sheet and you won't find one. Never will.


> I'm exporting CSS layers and Fireworks slices as the source


So if you ask Fireworks to export your file as css, you won't get any
href's.

Your export choice needs to be html and images, not css layers.

Like Jim,
I wish you well.

SKB wrote:
> So if you ask Fireworks to export your file as css, you won't get any
> href's.
>
> Your export choice needs to be html and images, not css layers.

Well, I never used the feature as I stay away from any Fireworks
generated code but, it seems to me that exporting CSS layers is just
another way to export HTML but using CSS for layout and without the use
of tables. As Joey pointed out, there seems to be a bug in Fireworks'
HTML export when using the CSS Layers setting. Again, I wouldn't know, I
never use FW to export tools so that's why I didn't participate in that
part of the conversation. I agree though that Adobe should fix that
bug as the feature is in the app and it should work as advertised.

But, with that said, Monte, it seems to me that you have two choices
here, one is to keep complaining about Fireworks' failings in an area
that is not its primary purpose (exporting HTML), keep up the attitude
and alienate anyone who could you here in the future. Or, you might
want to start listening to mine and others' advice regarding changing
your work methods. Using a graphics app to create HTML and CSS code is
really less than ideal. And I have seen the code ImageReady and GoLive
created. It was no better and in many respects a lot worse than
Fireworks'. As I said in my other post in the thread which you have
seemed to ignore so far, if you think you can create effective Web sites
100% visually in a graphics app without touching or understanding a line
of HTML or CSS code, you are simply delusional. But sadly, you certainly
are not the only one...

--
Stéphane Bergeron
reach:connect:communicate
www.webfocusdesign.com
blog:tutorials:articles:gallery
www.pixelyzed.com

Stéphane Bergeron wrote:
> HTML export when using the CSS Layers setting. Again, I wouldn't know, I
> never use FW to export tools

That of course should have said "I never use FW to export *code*"

Stéphane Bergeron wrote:

> Well, I never used the feature as I stay away from any Fireworks
> generated code but, it seems to me that exporting CSS layers is just
> another way to export HTML but using CSS for layout and without the use
> of tables.



From Fireworks ;

> Exporting CSS layers;
> Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) give you added control over how web pages are displayed.
> CSS layers let you create style sheets or templates that define how different elements,
> such as headers and links, should appear. With CSS, you can control the style and layout
> of multiple web pages at once.



As with any template, you can open the exported css layers html in
Dreamweaver, remove the sliced images Fireworks put in the layers to
make it look like your png, add your content and you have a table-less
layout. You still need to add the interactive html elements like you
would with any template. You still need to modify the css to use the
Fireworks images as backgrounds for those divs to complete the look you
want.

Now in monte's case. He wasn't trying to create a template to control
multiple web pages. He was trying to control one page. Generating over
300 lines of css and 40 divs to get a table-less layout for one page. Oh
wait, I forgot about the 100 lines of code for the hot spot if added in
like he wants. Kind of defeats the purpose, wouldn't you think?
Exporting as html and images only generates about 300 lines. Sounds like
the way to go. I wish him well either way he does it.


I don't use Fireworks generated code either. But, if I asked it to
export css, I wouldn't expect to see interactive html markup. Which is
what a kink is.

I need to go shovel some snow.

SKB