publish just a page

Freeway
41

No disrespect Hugh, but it seems to me your situation and request is
one that demands personal webspace and your avoidance of it seems
rather wilful. I couldn’t imagine attempting to be a web designer and
not being able to test sites live on the net. Trying to design for
the web without testing on the web is like buying a saddle but
refusing to fit it to a horse and preferring to just sit it over a
fence for evaluation. Your frustrations are living proof of the
limitations that you are imposing upon yourself.

But each to his own and I sincerely wish you luck… :slight_smile:

Cheers
Pete
On 21 Feb 2008, at 21:59, hugh wrote:

hehe…no chance, boys!!

Well, never mind. Seems like everyone prefers a server solution.

I am used to working with servers and uploading client files
etc. But for what I want here, your server solutions do nothing for
me at all. It’s just more management and ‘fiddling’ around. Sorry.
it doesn’t speak ‘ease of use’ to me one iota.

I’m sure I’ll get by one way or the other. But I do still think
it’s a good idea.

Hugh

freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Cheers
Pete

freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

42

As a last resort, Hugh, you could always point a web cam at your
monitor and show the changes live! :wink:

Colin

On 21 Feb 2008, at 21:59, hugh wrote:

hehe…no chance, boys!!

freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

43

Pete, comments and critiscism accepted.

But yes, I AM imposing limitations on myself - in an effort to keep things simple and fit my way of working! No, I am NOT particularly frustrated by it - I just think it might be a good idea!

Hey, alt+apple+P publishes to a folder. All I want is a couple of check boxes and alt+apple+P again!

Interestingly, what started as a small technical enquiry/suggestion…has turned into a discussion on the way one should work! Sorry everyone, I’ll work the way I want!!

Live long and prosper.

Hugh

freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

44

Hi Hugh,

Thanks for the suggestion, we have it logged already so I will add
your name to the list of requesters.

Option-Cmd P still exists and will open the preview window in Freeway
4+, this is effectively the same as looking at your page in Safari.
The “Preview in [Default] Browser” command now uses a B instead of a P.

Cheers,

Joe Billings
Support Technician
Softpress Systems Ltd

On 22 Feb 2008, at 02:20, hugh wrote:

Pete, comments and critiscism accepted.

But yes, I AM imposing limitations on myself - in an effort to keep
things simple and fit my way of working! No, I am NOT particularly
frustrated by it - I just think it might be a good idea!

Hey, alt+apple+P publishes to a folder. All I want is a couple of
check boxes and alt+apple+P again!

Interestingly, what started as a small technical enquiry/
suggestion…has turned into a discussion on the way one should
work! Sorry everyone, I’ll work the way I want!!

Live long and prosper.

Hugh

freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

45

Ok - Freeway could have a simple command ‘Publish selected page(s) to new
location’, and then choose a location in the dialog that follows.
But these are still web pages and a resource folder and have to be manually
sent or uploaded somewhere then viewed in a browser - so it seems a long
route compared to simply following any of the ideas offered by others here.

I have listened and joined you in this thread and have one last thought that
might appease your fancy and yet also serve the larger community and that
would be if Freeway could export a page to pdf.
This would be purely a flat visual rendition at 72dpi and not print-worthy
except as draft only. Not a web page - unless links were indicated but not
targeted. Just a design sketch approval tool.
Would such a simple utility be attractive to normal Freeway users?

Technical matters don’t exist in a vacuum - because they are attempts to
serve a purpose. Discerning the underlying desires and needs that one or
more are seeking, for a common good to be better addressed technically,
involves the weighing up of trade offs.

Flexibility is expression of willingness to put the goal clearly in charge
and not fix the means and thus subordinate the goal. There are of course
limitations to be addressed, overcome or worked around - and unintended side
effects that may cause more harm than the good intended.
A lack of flexibility is a preset mentality that says ‘It should be thus’
(which is ‘I want it thus’). This can be adopted but is going against the
flow because it is essentially unwilling to re-evaluate.

Simplicity may seem to be achieved by avoiding perceived difficulties but
such attitude inevitably defers a period of adjustment that can become
insurmountable or fatal. (Which in this case would mean to give up doing it
if the tools and environment didn’t match one’s criteria).

I have no idea whether Softpress follow such threads as this but it may be
that all the views expressed are a feedback that informs and shapes their
viewpoint. There are far too many occasions when I repetitively mouse in
Freeway that I would much rather be addressed. For if ‘stupid’ is merely a
persisting in what does not work, then I feel stupid when I do what a
computer is designed to be programmable to do for me. (But I haven’t
explored 5 yet so much may have addressed already).

all the best
Brian

hugh said recently:

Pete, comments and critiscism accepted.

But yes, I AM imposing limitations on myself - in an effort to keep things
simple and fit my way of working! No, I am NOT particularly frustrated by it -
I just think it might be a good idea!

Hey, alt+apple+P publishes to a folder. All I want is a couple of check boxes
and alt+apple+P again!

Interestingly, what started as a small technical enquiry/suggestion…has
turned into a discussion on the way one should work! Sorry everyone, I’ll work
the way I want!!

Live long and prosper.

Hugh

freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

46

Sometime around 22/2/08 (at 10:56 +0000) Brian Steere said:

if Freeway could export a page to pdf.
This would be purely a flat visual rendition at 72dpi and not print-worthy
except as draft only. Not a web page - unless links were indicated but not
targeted. Just a design sketch approval tool.

This sounds like a rather interesting feature request.

But as I type, I realise that it is possible to do this right now.
Preview in a browser, then in that browser choose File > Print and
then use the built-in Mac OS ‘print to PDF’ ability to produce a PDF
file of the page.

Hugh, would this process be any help?

k

freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

47

On 22 Feb 2008, at 10:56, Brian Steere wrote:

would be if Freeway could export a page to pdf.
This would be purely a flat visual rendition at 72dpi and not print-
worthy
except as draft only. Not a web page - unless links were indicated
but not
targeted. Just a design sketch approval tool.
Would such a simple utility be attractive to normal Freeway users?

I know it hasn’t got pdf but the Export command already gives you a
variety of cross-platform flat image options so a jpeg or tiff is
easily produced for evaluation of layout.

Thinking aloud - in InDesign (and other print apps) one can select
print All, or Range to select a smaller group of pages. This is fine
because the groups are sequential. In a web site the heirarchy is not
so clear cut with links connecting multiple pages within and beyond
the individuals selected. Publishing just a couple of pages will
result in dead links so a true impression of the site is not created.
Publishing separate pages would also require a second Resources
folder which invites all sorts of confusion as far as I can see. The
result would be like pressing the Print button and asking your laser
printer to decide what is important and what isn’t. The alternative
is going through all pages, deselecting links and prioritising items
before publication, isn’t it, even if that option were available?

Given the way Freeway works it seems to me that doing a quick Save
As, changing the site folder in Document Setup, stripping out the
unwanted pages and then publishing the result will avoid the
Resources confusion. It only takes about a minute. Then the new site
folder can be zipped up and emailed to a client for previewing on
their own webspace/server. It is all there already.

Still seems like a bit of a pain for the clients when I would have
thought they’d be more impressed by actually going directly on to the
web and seeing something live. One of the reasons I use my own
webspace is that I worry that if I didn’t my technical savvy (such as
it is) could be called into question and then at the client’s the
word cheapskate might enter the conversation… no offence, Hugh,
just my impression of the wider implications - i know you have your
own reasons for your methods and that’s fair enough but your self
imposed limitations must be causing you SOME hassle otherwise you
wouldn’t have posed the question.

Cheers
Pete

freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

48

Here’s an example…

One of my clients has a very long and wordy site which has a lot of legal type stuff on it. There are frequent changes to pages, changes which are logged in an Excel spreadsheet. With a every change I save another version of the Freeway document, i.e. ‘save as’ clientsite220208.

This version may make small, but crucial, changes to three pages. As well as showing the client the changes I have to SEND him the changed files for loading to his own internal server, where a mirror copy of the site is kept.

In this situation I do not want to publish the whole site, I just want to publish the changed pages. These can be sent to him as well as archived with the versioned Freeway file, and the Excel record updated.

Yes I could publish the whole site and then just send him the three updated pages (binning or stripping out the rest) but some of you know how long a big site ‘publish’ takes. Also, while one can strip out the unwanted pages from a site, it’s much more difficult to strip out the irrelevant resources!!

Brian, you say [quote]Publishing just a couple of pages will result in dead links so a true impression of the site is not created. Publishing separate pages would also require a second Resources folder which invites all sorts of confusion as far as I can see.[/quote]

Can we retain all links? I don’t see why not, couldn’t that be done?

…“a true impression of the site”…yes, but this is for me to decide! I, we, my client and I, whoever, may not be after “a true impression of the site”…we may want just a quick and dirty fix!

I’m afraid I see no confusion at all in having a second resources folder. If you have a site with sub-directories you have any number of ‘second’ resources folders anyway!

A publish dialogue might (I say might!) go something like this:

Publish selected pages to: (browse to folder)
Include resources: (checkbox for yes or no)
Retain internal links: (checkbox yes/no)
Retain external links: (checkbox yes/no)

It doesn’t strike me as taking more than 5 seconds to click those options…

I think we ought to close this thread now. I think it’s run its course and has highlighted, for me, some very interesting alternatives. And, as usual, it has been full of good advice from some very wise and wonderful people. Thank you to all.

If there is any future in this feature, I’m sure the folks at Softpress can take it on and deliberate its worth. Although I’m sure there are more pressing matters…like getting rid of the number of duplicate resources that build up in a site folder!

Thanks everyone for the discussion and advice.

regards
Hugh

freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

49

This all sounds like a good candidate for Max’s excellent WebYep CMS actions.

Why not just let the client edit the small text changes ‘themselves’. And get rid of the whole hassle of file shifting and proofing small changes - just does not sound very efficient for you or them.

This version may make small, but crucial, changes to three pages.

freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options