SamJolly
Posts: 9
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 6:53 AM |
|
Hi all,
I am looking at CCS again. However one of my first comments is the "Blocky" interface of applications generated using CCS. You see it in the the UltraApps Apps as well as the samples in addition to the generated code. Now I suspect one can improve this via CSS modification, but I would appreciate any advice or comments.
Thanks,
Sam
|
 |
 |
ReneS
Posts: 225
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 8:54 AM |
|
Hi,
You can modify the css and/or html with an external editor just as you like. Just leave the CCS "tags" intact.
Rene
|
|
|
|
JimmyCrackedCorn
Posts: 583
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 1:36 PM |
|
we are currently working on creating some "best practices" for integrating CCS pages with Dreamweaver sites. I have designers who create beautiful HTML/CSS layouts and although I think CCS provides a lot of really nice layouts that are highly customizable, I would tend to agree they can look a little blocky! :)
so far, what we have done is choose the most basic template in CCS and then modify the CCS-generated stylesheet to match our designs. we are still working out all of the issues with integration but I plan to report back here in detail as to how we get this all done.
_________________
Walter Kempees...you are dearly missed. |
|
|
|
wkempees
Posts: 1679
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 1:48 PM |
|
@JCC
That would be a nice gesture.
@SJ
Blocky but at least with rounded corners, lol, styles are not that bad.... style editor and button generator are 110%
Remember CCS is datacentric, in large datacentric application we can not take the focus from the organized data in favor of fancy templates. (mpo)
When doing portals and such I agree, but then there are many ways to skin this cat.
Walter
jm2ct
_________________
Origin: NL, T:GMT+1 (Forumtime +9)
CCS3/4.01.006 PhP, MySQL .Net/InMotion(Vista/XP, XAMPP)
if you liked this info PAYPAL me: http://donate.consultair.eu
|
|
|
|
JimmyCrackedCorn
Posts: 583
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 2:29 PM |
|
walter, you make a good point. some of our systems are intended for back-end use by our customers. in those cases we use CCS as-is because it provides a very professional looking interface with lots of color/style flexibility.
the only time we bother with changing the look and feel is when we are doing public-facing (B-to-C or B-to-B) sites. then we usually have to integrate CCS pages with a design that has been crafted to match a brand, image, etc.
but whenever possible (back-end, private systems, intranets, etc.) we use straight CCS!
_________________
Walter Kempees...you are dearly missed. |
|
|
|
wkempees
Posts: 1679
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 3:27 PM |
|
@JCC
And can't be beaten.......
@all
Search forum for Artisteer . com
But at this forum, fortunately, everyone is right!
Walter
_________________
Origin: NL, T:GMT+1 (Forumtime +9)
CCS3/4.01.006 PhP, MySQL .Net/InMotion(Vista/XP, XAMPP)
if you liked this info PAYPAL me: http://donate.consultair.eu
|
|
|
|
SamJolly
Posts: 9
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 4:40 PM |
|
Thanks folks... You seem to confirm what I thought... Yes I realise that what CCS provides is pretty good, but I think for Customer facing sites it needs modification which "JimmyCrackedCorn" confirms. It is getting the right approach to integration which will be key since often a designer presents the template html which then has to be "linked" up to the dynamic bits.
"JimmyCrackedCorn", your work sounds interesting..... It will be good to hear how you conclude on this.
Sam
|
|
|
|
wkempees
Posts: 1679
|
| Posted: 06/23/2008, 5:49 PM |
|
@Sam
Consider this, non commercial remark:
CCS, web enabling your data(base), allowing for external editing of templated view.
Others (Netobjects Fusion for instance), Graphic WebDesign tool, with datamanipulation capabilities.
Respecting your opinion,
Walter
_________________
Origin: NL, T:GMT+1 (Forumtime +9)
CCS3/4.01.006 PhP, MySQL .Net/InMotion(Vista/XP, XAMPP)
if you liked this info PAYPAL me: http://donate.consultair.eu
|
|
|
|
SamJolly
Posts: 9
|
| Posted: 06/24/2008, 2:14 AM |
|
Walter,
Thanks for the comment. I assume you are suggesting that one uses an external tool to enhance the design such as Dreamweaver etc...
Infact I use Microsoft's Expression since my background is ASP.NET. I have really wondered about the benefits of using CCS since I can achieve a lot in Visual Studio, however one has to write more code in VS and I needed a tool to provide functionality quickly. Thus I started looking at CCS again. I guess I will end up using Expression to optimise the page design particularly the CSS. Hopefully the mods will not get overwritten.
Finally I wanted to keep my PHP options open, and this is where CCS shines I guess.
Sam
|
|
|
|
wkempees
Posts: 1679
|
| Posted: 06/24/2008, 3:26 AM |
|
Check out the InMotion option in CCS4.
Read, if you did not already, the articles covering that.
Seems, to me, best of both worlds.
I am seriously looking into that, as soon as I master IIS7 on Vista.
Walter
_________________
Origin: NL, T:GMT+1 (Forumtime +9)
CCS3/4.01.006 PhP, MySQL .Net/InMotion(Vista/XP, XAMPP)
if you liked this info PAYPAL me: http://donate.consultair.eu
|
|
|
|
SamJolly
Posts: 9
|
| Posted: 06/24/2008, 3:45 AM |
|
Walter,
Yes I am using the InMotion framework since it is architecturally better since method calls just need generating as opposed to all the method code. A much better approach to code generation in my view.
So I guess you will be adding ASP.NET to your signature soon 
Sam
|
|
|
|
DeanCovey
Posts: 22
|
| Posted: 07/13/2008, 3:06 AM |
|
I have been using Code Charge studio since 2.x days but I am not familiar with Dream Weaver other than their web site.
I have wondered if I owned Dreamweaver, would I even need Code Charge? I know it's a little pricier, but it looks more powerful on the GUI end. Or am I missing something??
|
|
|
|
JimmyCrackedCorn
Posts: 583
|
| Posted: 07/13/2008, 4:29 AM |
|
Quote DeanCovey:
I have been using Code Charge studio since 2.x days but I am not familiar with Dream Weaver other than their web site.
I have wondered if I owned Dreamweaver, would I even need Code Charge? I know it's a little pricier, but it looks more powerful on the GUI end. Or am I missing something??
We use both. They are very different!!
Dreamweaver is a WYSIWYG HTML editor with some stuff built in to help connect to databases. It has some powerful features for web design but I should mention that all of our web designers use Photoshop for the design and then Dreamweaver for the assembly/production.
CCS is a code-writing tool for creating all of the database CRUD (Create, Read, Update and Delete) operations. When you need a way to maintain an online database you can create the entire application quickly in CCS! Dreamweaver won't write any code for you based on your database tables.
If you work with online databases to drive your content then you should use CCS. If you do not use databases then Dreamweaver might be a better fit.
If you do both...then get both!
_________________
Walter Kempees...you are dearly missed. |
|
|
|
feha
Posts: 712
|
| Posted: 07/14/2008, 1:14 PM |
|
Hi
I think that for making admin part the CCS generated code is much better than any other.
Just create some DIV's around it and use css to position them without editing the CCS css.
As for a Front Page you can make your own layouts without using any part of CCS css.
_________________
Regards
feha
www.vision.to
feedpixel.com |
|
|
|
SamJolly
Posts: 9
|
| Posted: 07/14/2008, 4:29 PM |
|
Hi Folks,
Thanks for all the comments...
I have been experimenting and I concur with the advice. I use MS Expression Web and it is great for HTML design and CSS. However I use CCS for all the DB stuff. The critical thing in my view is to use includes and keep the CCS units simple. You can then plug them in wherever. I have also been experimenting with DWT template files to control overall designs - things like common menus etc. It is possible, but you have to be careful.
Finally a good CSS tool like Expression can help with investigating the CCS CSS. So if you need to edit it you could although the files are quite involved. It certainly shows advanced usage of CSS !!
Thanks,
Sam
|
|
|
|
|
