Can Publisher capture a website from the web?

[Lynn]

I have 2 sites that I have been managing for a few years with netObjects
Fusion. Fusion will not run on my new Vista computer and I have been playing
with Publisher 2007 and like it. Rather than rebuilding 2 websites from
scratch I am wondering if there is a way I can "take" them from the web into
Publisher, short of copy past bit by bit. PS - Fusion creates a proprietary
file so its files are of little use. Thanks

 

[Ed Bennett]

I have 2 sites that I have been managing for a few years with netObjects
Fusion. Fusion will not run on my new Vista computer and I have been playing
with Publisher 2007 and like it. Rather than rebuilding 2 websites from
scratch I am wondering if there is a way I can "take" them from the web into
Publisher, short of copy past bit by bit.

I'd highly recommend against it even if it were possibl. Publisher
creates somewhat proprietary websites that lack in cross-browser
compatibility, manageability, and often usability.

I suggest using Expression Web; or failing that, FrontPage or Nvu to
manage your site. All of those should be able to open your current
website's HTML files directly.

 

[DavidF]

Publisher 2007 can open HTML files, but you may find that the code written
by Fusion will not. If you want to try it, reference: Common Sense Computing
101 aka "Why in the world would you lose
your publisher file?" :
http://msmvps.com/blogs/dbartosik/archive/2006/01/19/81461.aspx

This article was developed for those who lost their original Publisher
files, and also applies to Pub 2007. After reading a good discussion of how
to back up your files, at the end of the article is a method for rebuilding
your Publisher file from the html files. Its tedious, but it does work for
rebuilding from Publisher html files. Once again, this approach may or may
not work with your files.

You might also take the time to read "Using Publisher for web sites ":
http://msmvps.com/blogs/dbartosik/articles/80566.aspx
Publisher is primarily a DTP with limited web building capability. It is
intended for relatively small, simple static websites, so be sure your
expectations and goals are realistic before you start the process of
rebuilding your site. There are many people who have built good looking,
quick loading, functional websites with good cross browser capability with
Publisher, but you may find that it would be wiser to use a program that is
specifically designed for web building, with more open ended capability.

If you do pursue building your website with Publisher you should probably
post your questions on the web group: microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign.
You will find people that are willing to help you there.

DavidF

 

[Rob Giordano \(Crash\)]

Ouch...don't do that.

You can do what you want with MS Expression Web or most any web editor...but
Publisher is not that.



--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rob Giordano
Microsoft MVP Expression





|I have 2 sites that I have been managing for a few years with netObjects
| Fusion. Fusion will not run on my new Vista computer and I have been
playing
| with Publisher 2007 and like it. Rather than rebuilding 2 websites from
| scratch I am wondering if there is a way I can "take" them from the web
into
| Publisher, short of copy past bit by bit. PS - Fusion creates a
proprietary
| file so its files are of little use. Thanks

 

[Mike Koewler]

Lynn,

Just to add another post (some get paid by the byte they type), Serif
WebPlus 10 will import the NOF site - not perfectly, but close. But as
others have opined, moving from NOF to Publisher for web site creation
is a major step down the ladder.

(Opinion Follows) Until MS decides to embrace the W3C standards and lose
the idea that "everyone" uses IE, so the way "we" (being MS) codes pages
is fine, web designers will continue to find a growing percentage of
users who cannot view the site as designed. It wasn't that long ago that
IE could claim 95+ percent of the viewing market. That figure has
dropped to anywhere from 60-80 percent now. The truth is that the
Mozilla family (Firefox, Mozilla, Netscape, SeaMonkey), Opera and Safari
are gaining popularity and MS is not adjusting how their programs
produce html.

Mike

 

[Ed Bennett]

MS is not adjusting how their programs
produce html.

I beg to differ. Certainly IE is a way from properly rendering HTML, but
Expression Web is light years ahead of FrontPage in the "producing
standards-compliant/cross-browser-compatible code" stakes.

I'd agree that Microsoft is failing to adjust how non-webdesign-apps
(Publisher, Word, etc.) output HTML. I doubt that will change.

 

[Rob Giordano \(Crash\)]

I bet though if MS put it's mind to it they could create a noob webdesigner
that could produce simple (Publisher like) standards compliant webs.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rob Giordano
Microsoft MVP Expression





| Mike Koewler wrote:
| > MS is not adjusting how their programs
| > produce html.
|
| I beg to differ. Certainly IE is a way from properly rendering HTML, but
| Expression Web is light years ahead of FrontPage in the "producing
| standards-compliant/cross-browser-compatible code" stakes.
|
| I'd agree that Microsoft is failing to adjust how non-webdesign-apps
| (Publisher, Word, etc.) output HTML. I doubt that will change.
|
| --
| Ed Bennett - MVP Microsoft Publisher
| http://ed.mvps.org

 

[Mike Koewler]

Ed,

You may be correct. However, I visited the Expression web page and
clicked on a sample site. According to the W3C HTML validator, it had
230 errors. That's not what I would define a compliant.

Mike

 

[DavidF]

I would beg to differ a little bit. MSFT did remove the option of "rely on
vml for faster graphics downloading" in Publisher 2007, and that alone makes
a big difference in making a Pub web page more cross browser compatible. But
your point is well taken...I personally don't think there is a "will" to
make Publisher much better at producing html code. They would prefer that
you move up to Expression when you outgrow the capabilities of Publisher. A
business decision...not the inability to "fix" it.

DavidF

 

[DavidF]

You are right, but as I said to Ed, I don't think MSFT wants to. Look at
what you can do with Serif Web Plus...it has almost none of the limitations
in Publisher web pages, and it is noob-like in its ease of use, but open
ended in what you can do with it. Plus its only about $60!

DavidF

 

[Rob Giordano \(Crash\)]

The user can STILL make non-compliant code though!

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rob Giordano
Microsoft MVP Expression





| Ed,
|
| You may be correct. However, I visited the Expression web page and
| clicked on a sample site. According to the W3C HTML validator, it had
| 230 errors. That's not what I would define a compliant.
|
| Mike
|
| Ed Bennett wrote:
|
| > Mike Koewler wrote:
| >
| >> MS is not adjusting how their programs produce html.
| >
| >
| > I beg to differ. Certainly IE is a way from properly rendering HTML, but
| > Expression Web is light years ahead of FrontPage in the "producing
| > standards-compliant/cross-browser-compatible code" stakes.
| >
| > I'd agree that Microsoft is failing to adjust how non-webdesign-apps
| > (Publisher, Word, etc.) output HTML. I doubt that will change.
| >

 

[Charles W Davis]

Nvu is free!

I would beg to differ a little bit. MSFT did remove the option of "rely on
vml for faster graphics downloading" in Publisher 2007, and that alone
makes a big difference in making a Pub web page more cross browser
compatible. But your point is well taken...I personally don't think there
is a "will" to make Publisher much better at producing html code. They
would prefer that you move up to Expression when you outgrow the
capabilities of Publisher. A business decision...not the inability to "fix"
it.

DavidF