none
Front Page had Navigation View - what does Expression Have ???

    Question

  •  I got used to the navigation view in FrontPage and can't seem to find this hierarcy view in Expression.  I really used this as a cruth for linking pages and creating sub pages for category pages like products as there are many different products within our product catalog.  I needed more pages "underneath" or viewable in menu or button format to view.

    Please help I'm stuck on stupid in Expression till I figger out how to do this... Thank you,

    Bruce
    Bruce Burke V.P> Marketing & Sales
    Sunday, April 20, 2008 3:38 PM

Answers

  • About the only thing is hyperlink view.
    When in folder view, click Hyperlinks down in the lower left corner.

    FrontPage MVP
    Sunday, April 20, 2008 6:00 PM
  • " Surely the proposed "migration path" for this isn't "you have to hand craft navigation on each and every page, individually"?"

    No, you don't have to.  Use .dwt's, possibly also includes, or (if using asp.net), .master pages.

    (Look at the website templates that come with EW for examples of using DWTs for common navigation.)

    For a site that is being migrated, EW won't break the existing FP navigation bars, although if you want an easy way to make changes to them, you'd need to open the site in FP again to do it - which you can do.
    Sunday, May 04, 2008 4:14 PM
  • SixSigmaGuy said:

    All the hype on Expression web talks about how it's a replacement for Front Page; but it's completely damaged my web site.

    Well, no, actually, it does not. All of the third-party reviews I have read have emphasized that it is not a replacement for FrontPage, but rather a brand-new product more comparable to, and intended to be competitive with, Dreamweaver. In fact, a number of them have mentioned that FP users might find themselves discomfited with having to learn something about Web standards, even if they could continue to use, but not create or edit, FPSE-dependent bots, etc.

    And, apparently I missed it, but could you point out to me one single place where Microsoft says that EW is a replacement for FrontPage? I would be happy to have it illustrated to me where they have done so. Not saying with certainty that they didn't, just that I haven't encountered it anywhere. Just because FP is one of the (many) upgrade qualifier packages does not mean that EW is a replacement for FP, any more than it is a replacement for Office or Dreamweaver, which also qualify for upgrade. It is a new, standards-compliant Web design and development package, capable of creating compliant, cross-browser compatible Web sites by default, something that FrontPage on its best day never aspired to.

    A lot of FPers seem to have succumbed to wishful thinking, assuming that with FP basically discontinued, and EW the new Microsoft Webdev package, EW must be a FrontPage replacement. Wishing it so does not make it so. Oh, and if it has damaged your Web site, it had to have had help from you. EW supports existing FrontPage features, but does not create nor edit them.

    cheers,
    scott
    Sunday, September 21, 2008 5:47 PM
  • Expression Web is a "replacement" for FrontPage. FrontPage had a lot of issues mostly stemming from the webbots and archaic stles engine. Is styles were the same as Word and as we all shold know the web is not print.

    Expression Web is not a new version of FrontPage but a new standards compliant web editor designed to create pages that work well in browser besides just Internet Explorer. It also works with non-Microsoft tecnologies like PHP. Image that, instead of a web editor that creates pages that only work in Internet Explorer 6 and Microsoft created one that creates bog standard websites by default.

    Sure with FrontPage youc could create web pages that worked cross browser and cross platform BUT you had to work against the way MS designed it to work. Avoid the bot, not use the format buttons, not draw table cells and in FP 2003 not draw layers. Instead if you create a style once using Expression Web it will reuse what you already created instead of adding the same font code over and over again.

    As for navigation view, I never used it. Instead I structure my pages so that folder list serves as navigation view for me. Menus created using Navigation view were too limiting for my taste. Instead I use an unordered list, nested as deep as it needs to be. Bonus is with a little css I have a nicely styled menu. Add a bit of javascript and voila - dropdowns or flyouts.  Put it in your DWT or use an include and you update your menu in one place and only one place, kewl beans since now I have a nice lean menu with all of the working bits (CSS & JavaScript) in an external file that is cached by visitor which means my pages are smaller and load faster. What isn't there to like?

    If you have asp.net 2.0 on your server (either the MS version or for Apache servers the Mono version) you can use ASP.NET navigation componnet mentioned by burrManator. Pesonally, I tend to use the Project Seven CSS Expression menus (free and editor neutral)
    MS MVP Expression http://by-expression.com
    Sunday, September 21, 2008 9:08 PM
  • If a user opens a previously FrontPage build site in Expression Web and "needs" to get to navigation view, they can do this:

    In Expression Web:

    On the Tools menu click Macro, and then click Visual Basic Editor.  In the VB Editor click View and then click Immediate Window.  In the Immediate window pane type:
    ActiveWebWindow.ViewMode = WebViewNavigation
    Then press Enter on the keyboard to run the code.

    Voila! Nav View. :-)


    Chris Leeds
    Facebook
    Microsoft Press "Expression Web Step by Step"

    Friday, January 30, 2009 3:55 PM

All replies

  • About the only thing is hyperlink view.
    When in folder view, click Hyperlinks down in the lower left corner.

    FrontPage MVP
    Sunday, April 20, 2008 6:00 PM
  • A critical feature making FrontPage useful is its ability to organise a site logically (as well as physically) - embodied and exemplified in the "Navigation View".
    Where is the Expression Web equivalent?
    Surely the proposed "migration path" for this isn't "you have to hand craft navigation on each and every page, individually"?
    This is simply not satisfactory.
    I've just evaluated EW2 and the absence of support for any logical content organisation singularly prohibits my being able to recommend it to my customers.
    What's the story morning glory?!
    I have every support for ambitions to achieve standards compliance (commend all efforts in this area), however removing one of the primary advantages of (reasons for using!!!) FrontPage precludes my ability to recommend EW2 as a way forward to existing FP users.
    For those starting from scratch, EW2 presents an option worthy of some consideration, but without some provisions for navigation, FrontPage 2003 still achieves much higher heights (in terms of cost-effectiveness).
    I am quite frankly amazed that the drag and drop ability to organise any and all site content into a single, coherent structure (able to be flexibly deployed) has been so easily set aside (indeed I'm hopeful that EW2 designers can provide an equivalent (more powerful?!), better alternative in this product than critical reliance on FPSE) - please tell me what's the idea.
    Please recognise that removing a critical (and apparently not supported) FP feature precludes EW2 consideration for a siginificant number of users.
    Sunday, May 04, 2008 5:48 AM
  • " Surely the proposed "migration path" for this isn't "you have to hand craft navigation on each and every page, individually"?"

    No, you don't have to.  Use .dwt's, possibly also includes, or (if using asp.net), .master pages.

    (Look at the website templates that come with EW for examples of using DWTs for common navigation.)

    For a site that is being migrated, EW won't break the existing FP navigation bars, although if you want an easy way to make changes to them, you'd need to open the site in FP again to do it - which you can do.
    Sunday, May 04, 2008 4:14 PM
  • Totally agree with Faber, the loss of navigation functionality as implemented in FP, does not justify the move to EW2 for us or our clients.

    The path has been broken.



    Sunday, June 01, 2008 5:00 AM
  • Yes, the elimination of the FrontPage bots (navigation being just one of them) has significantly degraded the usefulness of Expression Web. On the other hand, as a long-time FP user I've looked high and low for another web editor of comparable capability, and have found none.  EW really is the closest thing there is to FP, and at least it lets you keep the FP stuff you have until you find a way to replace it.

    I think the reason for all this is Microsoft's decision to abandon the FP Server Extensions and to not replace it with any comparable functionality.  The FP Extensions require code running on web servers and MS obviously does not want to continue supporting code running on other people's server systems.  Another option might have been for MS to put up a string of its own servers to provide the FP bot functionality, but this would have been both complex and expensive, so they opted to shift the responsibility for providing the FP bot functionality to the webmasters who use EW.

    If this reminds you of the steamroller and the ant....welcome to the club.
    Sunday, June 01, 2008 5:16 AM
  • Wow, I'm really disappointed too with this removal of the navigation view in Expression Web.  My whole site is built on the Navigation links, or equilvalent.  How am I supposed to manage my site now if there's nothing to view my navigation links.  I sure wish Microsoft told me about this before I switched to Expression Web and uninstalled Front Page.  All the hype on Expression web talks about how it's a replacement for Front Page; but it's completely damaged my web site.  This is like releasing a new version of Microsoft Excel, but the new version no longer allows formulas!
    Sunday, September 21, 2008 4:54 PM
  • Wow, I'm really disappointed too with this removal of the navigation view in Expression Web.  My whole site is built on the Navigation links, or equilvalent.  How am I supposed to manage my site now if there's nothing to view my navigation links.  I sure wish Microsoft told me about this before I switched to Expression Web and uninstalled Front Page.  All the hype on Expression web talks about how it's a replacement for Front Page; but it's completely damaged my web site.  This is like releasing a new version of Microsoft Excel, but the new version no longer allows formulas!
    Sunday, September 21, 2008 4:55 PM
  • Wow, I'm really disappointed too with this removal of the navigation view in Expression Web.  My whole site is built on the Navigation links, or equilvalent.  How am I supposed to manage my site now if there's nothing to view my navigation links.  I sure wish Microsoft told me about this before I switched to Expression Web and uninstalled Front Page.  All the hype on Expression web talks about how it's a replacement for Front Page; but it's completely damaged my web site.  This is like releasing a new version of Microsoft Excel, but the new version no longer allows formulas!
    Sunday, September 21, 2008 4:55 PM
  •   Wow, I'm really disappointed too with this removal of the navigation view in Expression Web.  My whole site is built on the Navigation links, or equilvalent.  How am I supposed to manage my site now if there's nothing to view my navigation links.  I sure wish Microsoft told me about this before I switched to Expression Web and uninstalled Front Page.  All the hype on Expression web talks about how it's a replacement for Front Page; but it's completely damaged my web site.  This is like releasing a new version of Microsoft Excel, but the new version no longer allows formulas!
    Sunday, September 21, 2008 4:56 PM
  •   Wow, I'm really disappointed too with this removal of the navigation view in Expression Web.  My whole site is built on the Navigation links, or equilvalent.  How am I supposed to manage my site now if there's nothing to view my navigation links.  I sure wish Microsoft told me about this before I switched to Expression Web and uninstalled Front Page.  All the hype on Expression web talks about how it's a replacement for Front Page; but it's completely damaged my web site.  This is like releasing a new version of Microsoft Excel, but the new version no longer allows formulas!
    Sunday, September 21, 2008 4:56 PM
  • In your toolbox, look under "Navigation". The new tool is "very cool", "very powerful", and "cross compatible" and "future feature rich"! SiteMapPath... and Menu working with sitemap files.

    Burr
    Sunday, September 21, 2008 5:16 PM
  • SixSigmaGuy said:

    All the hype on Expression web talks about how it's a replacement for Front Page; but it's completely damaged my web site.

    Well, no, actually, it does not. All of the third-party reviews I have read have emphasized that it is not a replacement for FrontPage, but rather a brand-new product more comparable to, and intended to be competitive with, Dreamweaver. In fact, a number of them have mentioned that FP users might find themselves discomfited with having to learn something about Web standards, even if they could continue to use, but not create or edit, FPSE-dependent bots, etc.

    And, apparently I missed it, but could you point out to me one single place where Microsoft says that EW is a replacement for FrontPage? I would be happy to have it illustrated to me where they have done so. Not saying with certainty that they didn't, just that I haven't encountered it anywhere. Just because FP is one of the (many) upgrade qualifier packages does not mean that EW is a replacement for FP, any more than it is a replacement for Office or Dreamweaver, which also qualify for upgrade. It is a new, standards-compliant Web design and development package, capable of creating compliant, cross-browser compatible Web sites by default, something that FrontPage on its best day never aspired to.

    A lot of FPers seem to have succumbed to wishful thinking, assuming that with FP basically discontinued, and EW the new Microsoft Webdev package, EW must be a FrontPage replacement. Wishing it so does not make it so. Oh, and if it has damaged your Web site, it had to have had help from you. EW supports existing FrontPage features, but does not create nor edit them.

    cheers,
    scott
    Sunday, September 21, 2008 5:47 PM
  • Expression Web is a "replacement" for FrontPage. FrontPage had a lot of issues mostly stemming from the webbots and archaic stles engine. Is styles were the same as Word and as we all shold know the web is not print.

    Expression Web is not a new version of FrontPage but a new standards compliant web editor designed to create pages that work well in browser besides just Internet Explorer. It also works with non-Microsoft tecnologies like PHP. Image that, instead of a web editor that creates pages that only work in Internet Explorer 6 and Microsoft created one that creates bog standard websites by default.

    Sure with FrontPage youc could create web pages that worked cross browser and cross platform BUT you had to work against the way MS designed it to work. Avoid the bot, not use the format buttons, not draw table cells and in FP 2003 not draw layers. Instead if you create a style once using Expression Web it will reuse what you already created instead of adding the same font code over and over again.

    As for navigation view, I never used it. Instead I structure my pages so that folder list serves as navigation view for me. Menus created using Navigation view were too limiting for my taste. Instead I use an unordered list, nested as deep as it needs to be. Bonus is with a little css I have a nicely styled menu. Add a bit of javascript and voila - dropdowns or flyouts.  Put it in your DWT or use an include and you update your menu in one place and only one place, kewl beans since now I have a nice lean menu with all of the working bits (CSS & JavaScript) in an external file that is cached by visitor which means my pages are smaller and load faster. What isn't there to like?

    If you have asp.net 2.0 on your server (either the MS version or for Apache servers the Mono version) you can use ASP.NET navigation componnet mentioned by burrManator. Pesonally, I tend to use the Project Seven CSS Expression menus (free and editor neutral)
    MS MVP Expression http://by-expression.com
    Sunday, September 21, 2008 9:08 PM
  • Cheryl D Wise said:

    If you have asp.net 2.0 on your server (either the MS version or for Apache servers the Mono version) you can use ASP.NET navigation componnet mentioned by burrManator. Pesonally, I tend to use the Project Seven CSS Expression menus (free and editor neutral)


    MS MVP Expression http://by-expression.com

    ???

    What are those? Or, maybe I should say, "Where are those?" I didn't see them at the PVII site. Got a link?

    cheers,
    scott

    Sunday, September 21, 2008 11:43 PM
  • Project Seven CSS Express Menu http://www.projectseven.com/tutorials/navigation/auto_hide/ It is not one of theier extensions though I have been doing my best to get Al to make some Expression Web Add-ins. He said if he gets enough demand they will make some so ...
    MS MVP Expression http://by-expression.com
    Monday, September 22, 2008 12:50 AM
  • I was using FrontPage since FP2000.  Before I switched to EW2  I was using FP03.  I very much liked the navigation view as most of the posters here seemed to do also.  However, the navigation view became unnecessary in my redesigned website in EW2.  For one thing, FP's navigation view promotes an intricate hierarchical architecture that necessarily makes it tricky to navigate.  This is actually a downfall of FP!

    For non-techie type people (and I'm one) EW2 should use Dynamic Web Template pages with include files for navigation.  That way a visitor should be able to get ANYWHERE in your website with just one or two clicks.  That is a very important concept to grasp if you are used to FP.  With that sort of structure the hierarchy is very simple, and the include files immediately tell you what the navigation is, and that is where you change it.

    There are many beautiful templates free online, included with EW2, and commercially sold for EW2 that do all of this work for you and help you to see how it is all put together properly. 

    I've completely forgotten about the navigation view, and hardly miss it.  I would have no use for it if I still had it!

    EW2 despite some pitiful problems (primarily with the ftp publishing) and some other minor annoyances is an excellent upgrade from FP03, and will help you design a much better website too! It will also help you learn a lot more about html programming (more than I ever learned in FP) and it will make sense!  After using EW2 for a couple of months now, I find I spend more time in the code view than I do in the design view, and that was NEVER the case with FP.  It is also a lot easier for your website to work and look the same, no matter what browser, or operating system is used.   FP was almost impossible to get looking right from one browser to the next.

    Lastly,  Front Page, although it was efficient,  user friendly, and feature packed, it assumed that the whole world used nothing but IE on Windows, including servers!  This is another downfall of FP.  Wake up FP users!  Microsoft is trying to comply with the new world wide web order.  You should to..
    • Edited by nahc Monday, September 22, 2008 2:18 AM
    Monday, September 22, 2008 2:11 AM
  • Nahc, I agree with all that you have written, here. I used FP since FP 97 and rarely even looked at 'Navigation View'. I do have a site that uses shared borders, so I keep FP 2003 on my machine so that I can edit those things.

    Personally, I find EW-2 much more intuitive than FP, and using design view in conjunction with code view really helps me to learn CSS. I couldn't handle the implementation of CSS in FP: It drove me nuts! It's a snap in EW-2! I do not miss Navigation View.

    Except for the site that needs FP, I'll be doing all my developing in EW, and when needed, Visual Web Developer Express. When I decide to revamp that FP site, it will be total redesign using EW with CSS and Asp.Net.

    Regards,

    -Preston
    Columbia, CA. USA
    Monday, September 22, 2008 4:40 AM
  •  Preston,

    Convert your shared borders into includes and you won't need to keep FP around anymore. <g>

    Includes are just so much more flexible than shared borders ever work even in FrontPage.
    MS MVP Expression http://by-expression.com
    Monday, September 22, 2008 12:52 PM
  • Hi msimon1960,

    Shared Borders were deprecated by the FrontPage team when they released the 2003 version. They did this in favor of Dynamic Web Templates which provide the same efficiencies. If you're interested, here's an article on converting your shared borders to dwts using FrontPage:

    http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/frontpage/HA011277231033.aspx?pid=CH010504771033

    Expression Web is developed primarily for folks who earn their living designing websites for others and who are invested in the "intricacies of web coding" and proud of it.

    You might be more satisfied with the features provided by Office Live's website builder:

    http://www.officelive.com/free-website

    There are also plenty of tools out there by web hosts like Godaddy, that let you build your site w/ wysiwyg type tools.

    Anna

     


    http://blogs.msdn.com/anna
    Friday, January 30, 2009 2:43 AM
  • msimon,

    Would you please stop posting in threads that are 6 months or more old. Start a new thread if you want to complain about the navbots going missing but frankly as you can see from this thread and the other old closed threads that you have been resurrecting there are many easy and better ways to do everything the navbots did that will load faster and WORK on all browsers.

    If you want simple how about an unordered list, nested if you  have sublevels. With CSS you can create your rollovers using a simple :hover definition instead of dozens of lines of javascript and multiple images for each button. These techniques have been around forever (okay the first presentation I did on using css for rollovers was back in 2000-2001 so maybe forever is a slight exageration but in internet terms that is ancient.)

    If you want a proprietary, non-standard pain in the rear end to maintain web editor that lets you use something that is similar to bots go look at NetObject Fusion. I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole but it may be just what you are looking for.


    MS MVP Expression http://by-expression.com
    Friday, January 30, 2009 5:19 AM
  • If a user opens a previously FrontPage build site in Expression Web and "needs" to get to navigation view, they can do this:

    In Expression Web:

    On the Tools menu click Macro, and then click Visual Basic Editor.  In the VB Editor click View and then click Immediate Window.  In the Immediate window pane type:
    ActiveWebWindow.ViewMode = WebViewNavigation
    Then press Enter on the keyboard to run the code.

    Voila! Nav View. :-)


    Chris Leeds
    Facebook
    Microsoft Press "Expression Web Step by Step"

    Friday, January 30, 2009 3:55 PM
  • Ahhh...the light is finally going on.

    I read the article you suggest.  I was shocked by the content -- the author apparently missed the point entirely of Shared Borders and the implication for navigational menus.

    Frontpage has a system for the automatic creation and maintenance of context sensitive menus.  It take information from the Navigation view, the page name, the theme, and positioning in Shared border for menu generation.  It worked perfectly for me (for 11 years anyway) in dozens of websites and saved me thousands of hours of time.  When you hear FP users talking about these systems (and going nuts) that is what they are peaking about.

    For the benefit of EW2 users who don't understand why FP users are so upset here's how it worked (the article REALLY missed mark here).

    The FP system read the information in the navigational system (how the pages are related to one another).  Then looked up the blank button from the Theme, combined it the page name property to create plain, hover, and selected buttons.  Then each webpage in the website was updated with the appropriate navigational menu options unique to that page.  It was all completely automatic -- you didn't run anything, it just happened in a background process.  If you added, renamed, moved, or deleted a webpage the navigation menus for each page were updated automatically.

    DWT's can't produce the same function -- only a static global menu can be created there.  CSS can't do it either -- or at least not without some serious handcoding, and I'm sure it can even then.  Even so, it's a level of complexity that is very unappealing and would create it's own set of maintenance issues.

    Chris Leeds and I were starting to develop a workaround that would have involved an XML sitemap and some ASP.NET coding that he might have been able to provide FP users.  Didn't get anywhere with it - got buried by EW2 users who really don't understand the problem proposing irrelevent solutions or suggesting all FP users should go back to school, blah, blah, blah...

    It was such an efficient tool many FP users won't move to EW without it.  Shame, EW has a lot to offer -- it's kinda like building a space shuttle and forgetting to put in a hatch.  Can't get in to operate the thing due to this barrier to entry if you follow my metaphor.

    If this helps someone understand the nature of the problem -- great!  If someone wants to argue the point and point out why FP users are stupid, lazy, etc. etc. etc. please save it.  Not interested.


    M.
    Monday, February 02, 2009 4:17 PM
  • Do yourself a favor and just stick with FP.  If you can't embrace the new standards then just stick with the old way of doing it.
    --
    Chris Hanscom - Microsoft MVP
    Resource Center | Veign's Blog | Web Development Help
    Monday, February 02, 2009 4:28 PM
  • Matt,

    I honestly believe that no one here has called, or will call, FP users 'lazy, stupid, etc....'. If that were the case, then Cheryl would not have started the thread regarding suggestions/fixes for EW. We do care, and we want folks to be able to create sites that work well and look nice.

    If EW is not working for you, then that's OK by us. We have no control over the development of EW: All we can do is make suggestions to the dev team. Whether or not they incorporate our ideas is enitrely up MS.

    So, since EW is not 'filling the bill' for you, you are welcome to continue to use it. However, despite it's capability to generate shared borders, use themes, etc., the production servers that must have the server extensions to make them work are becomming a rare commodity. Not 'if', but 'when' the FPSE go away, sites that rely on the FP-specific code will have to be reworked, or remain unusable.

    Should MS update the FPSE for older versions of IIS, Windows Server, or for Unix servers is another topic entirely, and is not one for this forum.

    I hope that for folks such as yourself, that you can continue to develop in FP and the sites work as you expect. Good luck to you.

    -Preston


    Columbia, CA. USA http://www.gildedmoon.com
    Monday, February 02, 2009 4:55 PM
  • Preston,

    Matt is entitled to his opinion and if he chooses to disregard the effort that many have put into tutorials, free templates and articles to help people migrate that's his choice. Many of us have said that migrating from FP to Expression requires some effort and that those who are not willing to make an effort should stick with FrontPage, use an online editor like those provided by many web hosts or Office Live.  That the web has changed and unfortunately that means you have to keep up with those changes. (I sometimes wish the pace of change on the web would slow because I get tired of constantly having to learn or relearn how to do things as standards, browsers, and capabilites change myself.) Should someone interpet that advice as calling others "lazy or stupid" then so be it.
    MS MVP Expression http://by-expression.com
    Monday, February 02, 2009 7:37 PM
  • I for one am glad you posted your query to this thread msimon - relevant and appropriate to the original post and a worthwhile contribution to the discussion for those of us with an eye on this (why advise to unnecessarily create new threads?! water down the discussion? what's the point in "watching" a thread if the general advisement is to always create a new thread for any query, even if raised and under discussion? This isn't actually very helpful advice for constructive problem solving, even if good for obfuscation).
    Almost seems like a state of denial about this from the EW/MS establishment.
    Perhaps these are the folk who previously elected to use FP over DW for substantial web development and felt the constraints more than those of us using for more modest applications and perhaps benefited more from the efficiencies of the tool? Whatever - not really important.
    I applaud (overdue!) efforts to adopt web standards, but in this instance the nose is bitten off to spite face in depreciating the navigation view.
    Agree with you that workarounds proposed do not deliver equivalent granularity nor efficiency. I remember originally adopting FP to expedite web development not demand more work! We're left out of the EW vision. Apparently competing for the professional web development community is more important that preserving/maintaining/improving established customer needs.
    In any case, I think you and I may be at one in missing what was a critical FP feature from its so called replacement. Until this is substantively addressed, at this time I can't recommend EW to non-web-professional customers. On the positive side FP2003 (where still available) is cheaper now!
    We can but hope that MS gets some improved perspective on this within the product development team, 3rd party developers fill the glaring breach or we'll have to look elsewhere.
    Dissatisfied is the word.
    Saturday, February 07, 2009 9:12 AM
  • Chris Hanscom MVP,
    Is that official MS guidance you offer there?!
    Pursuant to contributing to EW sales, I thought MS were in the midst of retiring FP and discontinuing support?
    Sadly because of this critical functionality missing in EW I think I would represent a significant number of users in wishing that MS would support as you propose as an interim way forward.

    Do say if I've missed something.
    I also must say that it's in no small part aspects of the design and implementation of the tool (down to the product team, not the user!) that determines compliance with web standards or otherwise (hell I've been handcrafting standards compliant HTML since before FP was even a twinkle of an eye!!). Just because FP was deficient in this respect does not infer that losing important functionality is acceptable nor that users "can't embrace new standards". A new version of a product that doesn't deliver the same functionality as the previous is not the users' fault!
    Saturday, February 07, 2009 9:41 AM
  • Two points of clarification.

     "Chris Hanscom MVP,
    Is that official MS guidance you offer there?!"

    MVPs are NOT Microsoft employees.

    "A new version of a product that doesn't deliver the same functionality as the previous is not the users' fault!"

    EW is not a new version of FP.  There is no new version of FP.  This is a rather important point.  EW is not an evolution of the way FP did things, but a new product.  (You certainly are free to miss aspects of FP, and to continue using it, of course.)
    Saturday, February 07, 2009 6:54 PM
  • Kathy,
    Thank you for your "clarifications".
    Though apparently irrelevant to the actual subject of this thread!
    Agreed MVPs are not Microsoft employees.
    However the dischordant chimes arising from the (non-employee, yet professionally "most valued") MS chorus are sadly indicative of the appaulingly dissatisfactory official position.
    Correct EW is not a new version of FP. Yes a rather important point, although totally overshadowed by the fact that it is the billed replacement!!!
    Your sophistry is not helpful.
    You and Chris both assert that users are at liberty to continue using FP2003. This apparently conflicts with the MS advisement and proposed EW migration path.
    Are you actually able to provide any helpful, accurate guidance to FP users (since MVPs don't seem clear, I guess this is asking too much?!) or just argue semantics, deny any issue and tell us we're welcome to miss what we're losing?!
    Friday, February 13, 2009 12:38 PM
  •  Is this clear enough for you?

    1. FrontPage was discontineud with FP 2003as announced in 2005 at the PDC.
    2. FrontPage will continue to be supported by Microsoft until 2013 under the Microsoft Life Cycle Support policy. See: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/gp/lifepolicy (FP is part of Office which is a business application, it was never intended as a home user web editor though many of course used it for such.)
    3. Microsoft maintains a newgroup which I think also has a forum interface to provide user to user support.
    4. Microsfot still has FrontPage MVPs awarded for helping people in that forum and in other venues like the frontpage group on Yahoo Groups, forums such as Time for Web and other third party venues.
    5. For home users Microsoft suggests Publisher as the replacement for FrontPage (yuck but its code isn't that much worse than FrontPage) and it has navigation creating tools built in.
    6. Expression Web is for the serious hobbyist or professional who is concerned about cross browser & cross platform compatibility and is willing to learn something about html, css, web standards (which MS does not control and is in fact playing catch-up with Firefox, Opera & other browsers, something I find ironic since IE 4 was so much more standards complaint than Netscape which was the dominant browser at the time with a 90% market share, MS apparently didn't remember how they beat NN so were in turn beat up by newer standards based upstarts when they moved from web standards with IE 5.)
    7. To replace FrontPage for the Microsoft Office users SharePoint Designer supports SharePoint, Office for the Web and is aimed for use in controlled environment where you can optimize sites for Internet Explorer and don't have to be as concerned with cross browser/platform compatibity. You can still create standards complaint sites with it just as you could with FP but you have to avoid the bots and components to do so since as stated those are optimized for IE so frequently don't work in other browsers (ironically that includes in some cases IE 7.)
    8. People here have lost patience with people who are whining about FP bots that are missing from Expression Web. Notice the original dates of many of the threads that have been dredged up 6-20 months old from the original post. Many like this one had no post for 5 or more months before being resurected.
    9. Whining here doesn't accomplish anything because this is a user to user forum with very, very little MS particiaption.
    10. Asking how to accomplish something is much more productive than complaining you can't do something in Expression Web that you could do in FrontPage - Expression Web is not FrontPage 2005 or 2008. It is an entirely different program but MS kept some backwards compatibility. I'm thinking that may have been a mistake because there is just enough backwards compatibility to make some people think it is a new version of FrontPage - it isn't.
    11. Expression Web is much more powerful than FrontPage but it is not as easy to use for those who don't want to learn principles of good web design and some basic html-css.

    <rant>

    Many people here whether MVPs or not have spent hours helping others with no remuneration other than the occasional thank you. Not only have they given step by step how to do things here many have archived or provided much more details on their own websites. This ranges from some of the contributions of people like KathyW, Paladin, Preston and Bill who look at sites, find the problem and post fixes. To those like Clarke who have provided tutorials that illustrate how they solved problems. Many of these were written for the person coming from FrontPage, again to use Clarke as an example he has how to do what the database wizards did in FP using the Expression tools in as WYSIWYG mode as posible. Others have provided written and/or video tutorials on how to set up Expression Web, migrating from FP, cleaning up FP code, using WYSIWYG only to create a website (much like you would in FP) along with lessons in what the CSS used in the tutorial does. While still others provide code samples to process forms using ASP.NET or PHP. Spot and fix issues in server side code. None of this is paid work but something done for whateverpesonal reasons the individual has. Most I know who provide such assistance do so because either they like helping others or appreciate that others helped them and "pay it forward".

    If you don't like Expression Web then don't use it, nobody here (with the possible exception of the MS employees) really care if you like/use/buy it or not. Most of the regulars answers here use more than one program to create web pages whether they are a "pro" or a serious amateur. I use Dreamweaver CS 4, Fireworks, Visual Wed Developer Express, Visual Studio (when I have to because I don't like it but that's just me not an MS failing per se), Camtasia, PhotoShop, Swish (for Flash since I don't have the time or desire to spend learning the much more powerful Flash Prol) and dozens of smaller special purpose programs (TopStyle, SnagIt, even button generators like Vista Buttons for quick and easy navigaton buttons) or extensions such as those from Webassist (Expression & Dreamweaver) or Project Seven (Dreamweaver only sadly but I do keep trying to get them to make ones for Expression but until MS settles on an add-in model and publishes a SDK I doubt they or other makers will make many.)

    </rant>

    Man, I wish I could coast on what I already know but sadly working on the Web doesn't work that way, it evolves too much. Instead, I get to try and keep up with all the different browsers, javascript libraries (MooTools, jQuery & YUI Library for example) So don't think you are the only one who has to change the way they work, everyone who works on the web has to do so frequently.


    MS MVP Expression http://by-expression.com
    Friday, February 13, 2009 8:28 PM
  •  Thank you... Thank you... Thank you...

    I lost my note with this 'how to' on it... I know... I readily admit that I am pathetically lame about this sort of thing, I need my crutches... I am not going to make a living with the damn thing, I am not an innovator I just want to add to my website... all I wanted the old Navigation Pane back!

    To the person who wondered why any non-uber-geek would ever even consider buying a sophisticated program like Expression Web. 

    When I bought a new computer it came with Vista on it, Vista would not allow me to load my old FrontPage because I did not have a copy of the original software. I had a few extra bucks and my FrontPage was old so I went to the software store to get a new copy. They said that Microsoft doesn't make FrontPage any more, the new webpage software from Microsoft was Expression Web... I bought it, it imported my old website (just a vanity blog I use to keep stuff on) with little difficulty but I could/would not start at ground zero just to figure out how to add one page to another page with the navigation pane you right clic, add, new, page and give it a name...I can add five pages in less than a minute and they are all formatted with a header (how do you do that in Expression web?,,, I never could figure it out)... 

     
    Sunday, August 02, 2009 3:01 AM
  • "I can add five pages in less than a minute and they are all formatted with a header (how do you do that in Expression web?,,, I never could figure it out)... "

    Use a DWT (which you could also have used in FrontPage).  Includes.  Master page if using asp.net.  Everything has already been answered in the previous posts in this thread.  Read them if you really are interested in the answer.

    Microsoft has created a link: http://expression.microsoft.com/en-us/dd326841.aspx for more on moving from FrontPage to EW.
    • Edited by KathyW2 Sunday, August 02, 2009 3:56 AM
    Sunday, August 02, 2009 3:27 AM
  • Pete, this thread is a year and a half old, and six months since the last post. Nothing has changed. Nothing is going to change simply because you resurrected this zombie thread and asked the same question the OP asked. FrontPage is dead. It has been officially dead since end of support was announced in 2005 (I thought it was 2006, but I trust Cheryl's memory better than mine on this), unofficially since the last release in 2003. It is not coming back. Ever. Get over it.

    If you "could/would not" be troubled to learn how to do it in a way other than the way FrontPage did it, then it looks as if you're stuck with your site the way it is, doesn't it, because unless you acquire a used copy of FrontPage that way is not going to be available to you.

    Sorry, but that is just the way it is. Grousing about it won't change it. We've heard it all already and, frankly, no one cares. FP had a good run, about ten years, IIRC. But the Web has far outgrown it. The last version released was built to target IE5, and like FP, that won't ever be back, either. It's time to bow up, learn at least a little HTML and CSS, and learn to do for yourself what FP used to do for you.

    Or, let your site stagnate. Up to you...

    cheers,
    scott
    Sunday, August 02, 2009 5:02 AM
  • I still use Frontpage because of the easy way to ad pages and change the link structure with Navigation View. But I will migrate when Expression ad something like Content Management. With a web based Content Management system it should be possible to ad pages and change the structure as easy as in Navigation view.
    Thursday, January 21, 2010 7:52 PM
  • I doubt that EW will ever have a CMS because EW is a deleopment platform, not a content management platform. If you want a CMS there lots out there. I haven't used it, but Content Seed has had good reviews here.

    I don't know if you read this entire thread, but there are good justifications for using such things as design time includes and Dynamic Web Templates rather than the FP nav bots.  Either or both of these will make your life easier and do not depend upon the Front Page Extensions to work properly.

    I use FP very infrequently and have pretty much switched over to EW and Visual Studio. These two apps, used in conjunction are far superior to FP. Just sayin'

    Cheers,

    --Preston


    Columbia, CA. USA The Gilded Moon-Sierra Nevada Photography
    Thursday, January 21, 2010 8:40 PM
  • Preston I believe The Lazy One is using Content Management system not in the way we think of it. His statement "...it should be possible to ad pages and change the structure as easy as in Navigation view." leads me to believe that he's talking about DWTs or master pages.

    T.L.O.: Using DWTs you can do exactly that, much better, in fact (but what you describe is not what is considered a CMS). You may not be looking for the right feature. Follow the links above (in this long-dead-thread--which should have been left dead.) to the posts on switching from FP to EW. Great information for what you need.

    Now, let's let this thread DIE. Enough, already!
    Thursday, January 21, 2010 10:25 PM
  • I'm not too proud to beg: Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease add a navigator view.

    Its spatial-relationship presentation was a Godsend to organize & comprehend a site's structure.



    • Edited by chesterar Friday, March 23, 2012 6:36 AM
    Friday, March 23, 2012 6:34 AM
  • chesterar,

    Why are you posting that here?  Please read the "Forum FAQ -- Start Here" post, which you should do for any forum, and you would see that this is a user-to-user forum.  This is not where you can talk to Microsoft or request features.  All you've done is drag a thread that started in 2008 up to the top of the message list.  Please don't do that in future: always look at the dates of threads you respond to, and do not drag up old ones.

    Friday, March 23, 2012 1:47 PM
  • Chris,

    Thanks for the tip but I haven't found Tools/Macro yet.  I don't have the Web Suite, just WE4.

    Where am I going wrong?  Thanks, Chester

    Saturday, April 21, 2012 6:12 PM
  • "Where am I going wrong?"
     
    You are using the wrong version of Expression
    Web. This thread, from several years ago, is
    talking about EW1, not EW4.
    EW4 does not have a Navigation View. EW4 does not
    do macros.
     

    Ron Symonds
    Microsoft MVP (Expression Web)

    www.rxs-enterprises.org/fp
    Saturday, April 21, 2012 6:31 PM
  • "Thanks for the tip but I haven't found Tools/Macro yet. I don't have the Web Suite, just WE4.

    Where am I going wrong?"

    This is EXACTLY why, across the entire World Wide Web--in every forum, there is one overriding rule: Never resurrect dead threads. It causes just this kind of confusion. EW1 was very, very different from EW4. When this thread was started, George Bush was still the President. Lots of things change in 4 years.

    And to the next clueless soul who stumbles upon this thread--Start your own thread. Let this thread die!


    Titanic, the movie, as CSS:

    @mixin iceberg {
         float: none;
    }

    #titanic {
         @include iceberg;
    }



    Saturday, April 21, 2012 6:36 PM
  • Chris,

    Thanks for the tip but I haven't found Tools/Macro yet.  I don't have the Web Suite, just WE4.

    Where am I going wrong?  Thanks, Chester

    Where? By continuing to consume breathable air when someone who still has a functional brain cell needs it, that's where!

    You bloody moron! You were told after your first post on the 23rd that this is a dead thread, and to start your own. Now you have come back to the same dead thread, and posted a completely unrelated question, again about a version three versions beyond the version which is the subject of this thread. Are you really as big an idiot as your behavior seems to make you appear. Are you auditioning for the role of "brain-dead cretin" in the next Little Theater production? Or did you manage to palm your meds and escape from the institution again?

    This thread is DEAD! This thread has NOTHING to do with EW4, and never has! This thread's title has NOTHING to do with the subject of your question! You are behaving like a witless jackass by continuing to post here! STOP IT!

    Yes, Jim, I know this language is going to receive scrutiny. I'm planning on it, hoping for it, trying to get someone with the power to do so to take a look at it and LOCK THIS DAMNED THREAD! PLEASE!

    There is absolutely NO reason to keep dead threads like this open, especially for threads which have been answered, and most especially for versions not available for FOUR YEARS! Locking them still leaves them available for those searching the forum later, but it keeps bottom dwelling single-cell slugs like this imbecile from continuing to post to them. 

    So, go ahead and delete this post; I fully expect it. Then lock the damned thread, OK? PLEASE!


    Please remember to "Mark as Answer" the responses that resolved your issue. It is common courtesy to recognize those who have helped you, and it also makes it easier for visitors to find the resolution later.

    Saturday, April 21, 2012 11:30 PM
  • Actually, Scott, the post does have to do with this thread.  See Chris's post about the ability to get an old FP navigation view in EW1 with the VB macro menu.  ...Of course, that was EW1, dated Jan 2009, and several statements in this thread do not apply to later versions, and especially to EW4.  I second your request to moderators to please, please lock old threads.
    Sunday, April 22, 2012 12:32 AM
  • Oh, right. I hope I can be excused for not looking back three years in this thread, or re-reading the whole damned thing to find what he was referring to. The point still remains that the macro menu and the VBA editor have been gone for TWO versions, and that he was responding to Chris's THREE YEAR OLD post, and that the Shared Borders which made the Navigation View work now DESTROY any page containing them in EW4, and this thread has NO LEGITIMATE REASON for being still open for posting, since the solution offered by Chris, and MARKED AS ANSWER, is still available to any souls still using EW2 or earlier. There is NOTHING further that be contributed to this conversation, and leaving it open only encourages brain-dead dweebs like this twit to go back three years and cherry-pick out a post to reply to.

    Please remember to "Mark as Answer" the responses that resolved your issue. It is common courtesy to recognize those who have helped you, and it also makes it easier for visitors to find the resolution later.

    Sunday, April 22, 2012 1:11 AM
  • Thank you contributors. Keeping this open actually served a great purpose. It made me understand that there still is no solution and that the latest of EW, EW4 actually destroys the borders.

    With more than 2000 pages in my integrated websites / domains I can't re-design them, as it takes too much of my volunteer time. But more importantly, I can't keep track of my structure and I need the ability to simply relocate a webpage according to need into a new location in the structure. For years I have been looking for an alternative programme todo so, but the only thing I could find was Fusion, but Fusion can't import a large site like mine. Fusion from Netobjects is an html generator, not an editor. That means it designs in another format and when you are ready it will export the website as html, which you then have to upload. I tried it years ago and then it was a great solution for people like myself who like to create and maintain their website(s) without spending much time on learning the works: Write it like a word processor, and structure the pages with a wysywig drag and drop facility such as this: http://www.birdlist.org/user_friendly_free_software/set_default_browser.htm. For me it was not capable of importing my FP sites, but it did import smaller sites. For now,  FP still works fine, in spite of its none-compliant setbacks, and people will still visit the pages as my 1000 000 visitors per year clearly show. So for new starters, Fusion seems the only active programme to do so now, but alas...... too late for my 30 integrated domains. I see I need to update my review on FP and Fusion.

    So, dear readers, as this pages comes up as the first page on the possibility of FP versus EW, it was relevant to keep the dialogue alive. We know now that also in later version, EW does not what FP users hope and they may read that Fusion is probably their best alternative for a wysywig structure design. Their is no rule on the internet, no fixed protocol. Even not on politeness, as I could sadly read on this page. Have a good day all

    Monday, October 01, 2012 11:33 AM
  • Actually there is no need to keep this thread open to get the information it contains. The discussion is about a version of Expression Web that does not even use the same code base as the last two versions.

    I'm sorry that you feel you cannot bring your websites up to modern web practices and create a standards compliant site but sooner or later your old site will no longer render acceptably in modern browsers. Your use of websites/domains implies that no one site is 2,000 pages. What I would do (and have done for many more than 2,000 pages) is create a dwt that looks exactly like the current site but using modern structuring, getting rid of table based layout (that's what the shared borders create, the various "borders" are either column rows or columns tacked around the existing page) with meaningful names. Then do one section at a time. Once everything has been cleaned up and converted to modern standards using a valid doctype (FP sites are always in quirks mode rendering which is one reason for display issues in mobile devices and many modern browsers especially as html 5 support increases) redesigning the site even one with hundreds of pages can be done in a few hours.

    As for structuring the site, folder list is my site navigation view. With meta data enabled if I rearrange the site all links are automatically updated just like in FrontPage (or Dreamweaver for that matter) so I really have difficulty in understanding why it is so difficult for you other than this comment " Write it like a word processor". Unlike paper the web is not a fixed media and you cannot expect that using methods intended for a fixed width, color, with clearly defined properties of ink absorption, gloss, sheen to work in a media that encompasses everything from the 2" screen on someone's non-smart phone to a xBox or other gaming system, "smart televisions", streaming appliances (Roku & similar) any of dozens of operating systems running another dozen or more browsers on computers with screens having as many as 2,880 x 1,800 pixels.

    FWYI, if you had learned to properly structure your web pages using semantics it your learning curve would be minimal. However, it sounds like you've created your pages using clicks on the toolbars in FrontPage which leads to

    <p><font size="16pt" color="blue"><b>Faux Heading</b></font></p>

    Instead of <h1>Real Heading</h1>

    Changing the latter's display for an entire site simply requires you to change the external css while the former requires you to find each and every instance and either clean it up into a real heading or replace the specific bits you want to change the display on. This is why cleaning up the pages is the critical time consuming part.

    Arranging or rearranging the files within a site - not a problem at all. Simply drag from one folder to another, to change the name- double click and type in the new name. Meta data will make the corresponding changes in the closed pages as long as you have it turned on.

    As for keeping the dialog alive - frankly there is no dialog worth continuing. Expression Web is a tool for professionals or serious hobbyists. If you don't want to know anything about how the web works then don't bother with this forum.


    Free Expression Web Tutorials
    For an Expression Web forum with without the posting issues try expressionwebforum.com

    Monday, October 01, 2012 3:16 PM
  • Keeping this open actually served a great purpose. It made me understand that there still is no solution and that the latest of EW, EW4 actually destroys the borders.

    Horsepucky! You could have learned that just as thoroughly had the thread been locked for new posts, since all of the information would still be available. It just wouldn't be open for jackasses to come around and reopen the damned thing again, and again, and again...

    I can't keep track of my structure and I need the ability to simply relocate a webpage according to need into a new location in the structure.

    That's a problem with your architecture, not with the software. If your site(s) are so chaotically organized that you yourself can't even keep track of them, that's your problem, not the software's. Furthermore, if you use EW in the fashion intended, you can easily drag and drop files within your structure. As long as you do so within the Folder List, EW will easily take care of updating all references to it within the site.

    Fusion from Netobjects is an html generator, not an editor.

    No, it's a piece of crap so-called WYSIWYG "designer," which, like all such programs, emits inaccessible garbage that falls apart as soon as a vision-impaired user increases text size in their browser. It is also not the subject of this forum, and discussions of it here are off-topic for the forum, which is another reason replies such as yours should not be posted here.

    So, dear readers, as this pages comes up as the first page on the possibility of FP versus EW, it was relevant to keep the dialogue alive. We know now that also in later version, EW does not what FP users hope and they may read that Fusion is probably their best alternative for a wysywig structure design. Their is no rule on the internet, no fixed protocol.

    Batcrap! There is no need for a "dialog." The question was answered, and marked answered, years ago! Nothing new of any value is contributed by continuing to resurrect the damned thing. Furthermore, recommending a piece of utter junk such as Fusion is both off-topic for this forum, it is terrible advice for anyone who aspires to produce modern, compliant, accessible, responsive sites. If for no other reason, for that your post does gullible, ignorant novices who may read this a disservice, and should not have been posted.

    Finally, there is indeed a consensus, a "protocol," among most forums that resurrecting old threads is to be discouraged. Many of them put admonitions in their FAQs, some auto-lock old threads, and others pop up warnings that a thread is old, and suggest starting a new thread instead.

    There is absolutely no reason that this zombie thread remain open for posting. Nothing new could possibly be contributed to what has already been said here, and leaving it open only serves to let clueless twits pop it back up to the top of the current thread list periodically, to the benefit of absolutely nobody!

    Moderators, PLEASE lock this damned thread! Let the FPers find it in their search results and learn what they can from it. But there is nothing more to be said on the damned subject that contributes anything, and only the possibility of asinine suggestions to use crap tools like NetObjects Fusion.


    Please remember to "Mark as Answer" the responses that resolved your issue. It is common courtesy to recognize those who have helped you, and it also makes it easier for visitors to find the resolution later.

    Monday, October 01, 2012 9:14 PM