Do any of the PSD to HTML sites work? [closed] - html

Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 11 years ago.
Improve this question
Hi I am skeptical about uploading my .PSD files to one of these websites that claim to convert .PSD to .HTML for you easily.
How do these work? Do they generate ALL of the necessary CSS?

They might be able to make HTML, but can they make clean, efficient HTML. Nope.
Are they smart enough to recognise a menu and use an unordered list, instead of a bunch of DIVs? Nope. Does it know when an image should be a background behind text, or when text should be merged with the background? Are they smart enough to save portions of the artwork as PNG vs. JPG?
This task is far too complex to automate. It's like when you have a MS WORD doc and save it as HTML - you get HTML, but it's full of clutter and superfluous mark-up is 10x larger than it need be. It works, but it's crap.

Related

Differences between CSS images and SVGs [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I was wondering if there are any differences between CSS images and SVGs on your website.
By CSS images I mean images created with divs in HTML and styled in CSS (like this: https://codepen.io/andrewrock/pen/jOEZxrY).
Yes, CSS images are more time consuming, but apart from that they're both animatable, you can use CSS variables on them, make them dynamic with JS, ...
So what are the differences of those 2? (Performance, Rendering, ...)
There are countless reasons why you should use a svg instead of a group of html elements:
Creation
There are hundreds of svg editors that allow in a simple way to realize a drawing or an icon. This is not the case for html. So drawing a building icon in full css would be really painful.
Sharing
The fact that it uses a standardized file such as svg, allows you to export your work to other tools and easily be exploited by someone else. Use tricky css rules to manipulate some span or div can be difficult for a newcomer to your project to understand.
User experience
On a website that use svg, you will able to open it on a new tab or to download it. Thats very comfortable for an user for exemple. If you use html an user will not be able to manipulate and thats can be really annoying
Performance
Because the svg is called most of the time a file you can compressed it on your server to gain more space and performance with some tools like Appendix J

web 2.0 sucks huge floppy disks? [closed]

Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I was able to create a web site 10 years ago with Microsoft Frontpage without learning anything, today with a copy of Adobe Dreamweaver CS6, I can't even figure out a way to change the font size of a simple text. CSS is the thing, so I went through the CSS tutorials in w3 and I get it now. It's a good idea, but It is also a good idea to kill creativity, ie all sites like similar, see screenshot below. It sucks floppy disks.
My questions will be:
Does web 2.0 really kill creativity?
Is there a "modern" web design application that I don't need to go into these CSS thing?
Is there a way to create a circular navigation menu like this using css? I want to have this menu in the middle of the page, and with a button on the corner to activate it.
No it doesn't
You don't have to use CSS. You can use inline styles,
but it won't be right. Using the CSS is a good coding practice and
you just need to learn it better.
Yes. If you google it, you'll find several links. Here is just some examples:
https://css-tricks.com/building-a-circular-navigation-with-css-clip-paths/
http://www.cssscript.com/pure-css-circle-menu-with-css3-transitions-transforms/

Why does the page source of Facebook, unlike stack overflow, look the way it does? [closed]

Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Below are examples of the page source from both sites. I am on chrome if that means anything. My Questions is, why do these two sites look so differently from each other? Why does Facebooks source look the way it does, paragraphs and paragraphs of code with no formatting compared to stack overflow where tags and elements are distinguishable from each other?
Does it serve a purpose for it to be shown the way it looks on facebooks website? I assume that's not how it was formatted in development but done that way after loading it to the site?
**Here is an example of Facebooks source code from the landing page**
**Here is an example of Stack Overflows source code from the landing page**
Not necessarily. Majority of the code is on the server side anyway so you can't see majority of the code for both websites. However, Facebook's code has been minified. This means the code has been scrunched together to take up less space so that the site will load faster.

How to get logo of a page when parsing? [closed]

Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I am trying to create a general parser for sites and get relevant information. First thing I would like to be able to do is being able to know what is the logo of the site.
Usually the logo will be an image that will link back to the main page, and might content the word "logo" in its ID.
What would be a good strategy or standards that I could apply in order to find what is the logo of a page when parsing it?
There isn't really a way to make this a generic process. There are no rules about what how the logo of a site will be displayed - so there is no single ID, class, tag or location you can look to. Likewise, images don't "link" to anything, an <a> link might contain an <img> tag, but thats about it.
Short of writing a long, long list of best guesses, there is no way to reliably parse an arbitrary HTML page and get a logo from it.

Designing layout in html [closed]

Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I use CSS to stylize my pages. I use % style instead of using px values. However, since I need to add several elements of different sizes in different positions, I end up spending more time in designing the layout than the coding.
I tried using a WYSIWYG editor but it uses px style coding. Can someone help me with a solution so that I can design the layout quickly and proceed to real part? I use WordPad right now.
The best thing to do is practice more. Get better at coding them, and reuse parts from prior projects where it makes sense.
There is no WYSIWYG tool that will save you time, for most projects. They all write garbage code, because editing with such a tool is a bit ambiguous. It is up to you as a web developer to write your markup and styles in a way that will be interpreted correctly across many user agents.