none
WordPress as Alternative to EW RRS feed

  • Question

  • I created my website, www.costaricatoursltd.com, entirely in EW.  It is content rich, wordy and lacks interactivity. Several in this forum last spring suggested using javascript or other slideshow alternatives to liven up my homepage. 

    I've been approached by a web design firm that uses WordPress.  I understand that WordPress has many plugins that make designing a webpage easier. 

    I'd be interested in any opinions as to whether there any downside to having a WordPress website, as opposed to my present type of site? 

    BronxinNC (Elliott)

    Wednesday, February 13, 2013 10:26 PM

Answers

  • Sure, Elliott, Innerfade would do the job quite well. It is lightweight, does not require Flash or any other video plugins of any kind, is viewable on all platforms, can be easily styled using standard CSS, and is SEO-friendly, since the content is standard HTML, and all text (captions, short descriptions, etc.) are present as text in the source code.

    If you take a look at the source code of this example, you can see that the rotation is simply an unordered list of divs (they're not necessary in this application, but provide an additional container for styling). The captions to the rotating images are simple paragraphs in each of the <li>s comprising each item, meaning that those keywords are indexed along with the rest of the page's content. Depending upon how creative you are in writing the copy to accompany each image, you can make a positive, and legitimate, contribution to the keyword density of the page(s).

    I've used Innerfade on several sites now, and it's a piece of cake to implement, free, and offers a lot of design freedom. And you don't need a blog to use it... ;-)

    cheers,
    scott


    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.

    • Marked as answer by BronxinNC Thursday, February 14, 2013 3:21 AM
    Thursday, February 14, 2013 3:07 AM
  • I understand what your saying.  Take a look at my Variety Tour page.  Is the YouTube video on that page embedded as you suggest?  On the home page in the menu bar, I am directing readers to my YouTube channel, so I'm not sure how I could use the iframe there. I'm deleting the Photodex link, since that would require an installation of software. I bet that was what Scott (Paladin) was referring to.

    Right. If you're referring to this statement...

    "It is lightweight, does not require Flash or any other video plugins of any kind, is viewable on all platforms, can be easily styled using standard CSS, and is SEO-friendly, since the content is standard HTML, and all text (captions, short descriptions, etc.) are present as text in the source code."

    ... then, yeah, that's what I was talking about. AFAIK, all browsers provide native support for javascript, and since you load the jQuery framework in the page's head section, the user need not install anything to view the effects, making the mechanism of viewing the slideshow completely transparent to the visitor. But, that was for slideshows, not videos.

    As for the YouTube iframe embed for your site, it has the advantage of keeping visitors on your site instead of sending them to YouTube, possibly never to return. It also does not require the visitor to go to the trouble of installing a plugin, like Photodex, or taking them to an unbranded Web page like your Photodex links currently do. Google provides full documentation on using this method, with sample code, which you can use to experiment with in implementing embedded videos on your site.

    FWIW, there is another free jQuery plugin for showing videos in a display similar to the LightBox effect, called prettyPhoto. It works like a champ, and although I have only used it for .swf files, according to this from its home page, it also supports embedding YouTube videos in a LightBox effect:

    “prettyPhoto is a jQuery lightbox clone. Not only does it support images, it also support for videos, flash, YouTube, iframes and ajax. It’s a full blown media lightbox.”

    So, that's another alternative you may wish to explore. In truth, there are many ways to achieve your objective which do NOT require installation of plugins, nor sending visitors away from your branded site, as both the YouTube Channel and Photodex methods do. Just sayin'...  ;-)

    cheers,
    scott


    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.

    • Edited by paladyn Thursday, February 14, 2013 9:00 PM
    • Marked as answer by BronxinNC Friday, February 15, 2013 2:04 AM
    Thursday, February 14, 2013 8:57 PM
  • Elliot, that page is exactly what I meant. It works great and keeps people on your site. I did just notice that the navbar on pages other than the homepage link to Photodex also, so you might want to change that too. As for your YouTube channel, you have six videos there, so it would probably work to make your own videos.htm page with all the videos embedded on it and just link to that. I haven't tested performance of a page with multiple iframe videos, but it should work fine, and would allow you to maintain the same page design and stay on your site. Hopefully someone with more experience will offer an opinion on this option.

    Jim


    'Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. Thomas Paine

    • Marked as answer by BronxinNC Friday, February 15, 2013 2:02 AM
    Thursday, February 14, 2013 9:43 PM
  • Take a look at my Variety Tour page.  Is the YouTube video on that page embedded as you suggest?

    Yep, that's the ticket. I had missed that iframed YouTube video and seen only the links to the YouTube Channel, and to Photodex. So, yeah, that does exactly what you're after, providing the video while keeping the visitor on your own site.

    I agree with Jim about moving those YT Channel videos to your site. Having a single page with multiple videos would work, or you might want to have a page with a descriptive paragraph about each, and maybe an image, which when clicked, launches a lightbox. Something along the lines of this page. When you click any of the "Testimonial Video" links, it opens the video in a lightbox. Now, I used CoffeeCup Video Player to create those videos and controllers, but prettyPhoto says it can also embed YouTube videos, so check it out...

    Like we've been saying all along, there are tons of things you can do to add interactivity, none of which require a blog platform, and which would arguably be more difficult to implement if you were using one.  ;-)

    cheers,
    scott


    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.

    • Marked as answer by BronxinNC Friday, February 15, 2013 2:05 AM
    Thursday, February 14, 2013 10:59 PM
  • BronxinNC,

    Wordpress is like legos, it snaps together nicely and for about 90% of what most websites need, it is fine.  However, when you get into that other 10% it is a nightmare.   If you need to create a page that is slighty different than the others or if you have unique needs you are in trouble.  Have you looked at Coffeecup software?  They have some very simple plugins for html that will do what you want.  Since ALL of wordpress is basicaly a plugin, just go find companies that offer plugins for websites.   It is almost the same thing, and, in the end, you will not need to redesign you site.

    Peter

    • Marked as answer by BronxinNC Friday, February 15, 2013 2:04 AM
    Friday, February 15, 2013 1:12 AM
  • You still need to fix the navbar on other pages. On the Calendar page the Videos link goes to YouTube, and on the Tours page it goes to Photodex. You also should look at using a DWT for consistency, as some pages have different widths and other variations. A DWT would greatly simplify making site-wide updates or styling changes. Other than that, looks like it's coming together nicely.

    Jim


    'Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. Thomas Paine

    • Marked as answer by BronxinNC Wednesday, February 20, 2013 8:51 PM
    Wednesday, February 20, 2013 6:11 PM

All replies

  • How much creative control do you want over the look and feel of the site? How much are you prepared to pay this "web design firm?" Modifying and creating Wordpress themes can be done, but it requires knowledge of HTML and CSS, as well as some understanding of the Wordpress Codex. And you would be using EW, or another Web development application, to do so anyway.

    If what you want to do is "liven up" your site, a great deal can be accomplished using the many plugins and other tools, most of them free, made possible by modern frameworks such as jQuery.

    Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with your site as constituted. And without knowing your objectives, I see absolutely no advantage to be gained by converting it to a Wordpress site. None. From your own comments ("It is content rich, wordy and lacks interactivity."), it sounds as if you are simply looking for design changes to remedy those... faults(??). That is not something that requires a change to a blog platform to accomplish, and in fact, design changes are more difficult to effect, not less, with a blog platform than a standard Web page. It sounds as if this "web design firm" is looking out for their billable hours, not necessarily your best interests.

    Be more specific: What, exactly,are you looking to change, or add? What, exactly, are your objectives? Your question is far too nebulous to answer as given.

    cheers,
    scott


    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.

    • Edited by paladyn Wednesday, February 13, 2013 11:03 PM
    Wednesday, February 13, 2013 10:48 PM
  • That is not a question anyone can answer for you.

    You need to find out what that firm plans to do, at what cost, and *exactly* what benefit you will gain from it.  Wordpress is easier for them to pump out sites with, assuming they are proficient in it, but you already have a site.  You'll be paying them to reproduce your content in WordPress, even if they added no other value.  I assume they say they will be adding value to it, but only you can decide if their pitch - the specifics of what value they will be adding - makes economic sense to you.

    Wednesday, February 13, 2013 10:56 PM
  • Paladyn, Thanks for your response and thank you for the kind words about my website.  It works well because most of my clientele is older and seems to prefer written detail rather than glitzy effects. I created it myself and another member of this forum had suggested the design.

    What I think I now need is more visual presentation, such as a sliding/rotating photo display on the home page.  For example, first volcano, then palm trees and then monkeys. Back in April you had suggested Jquery Innerfade.  Would that work for what I want to do?

    Elliott

    Wednesday, February 13, 2013 11:23 PM
  • Embed your YouTube videos to keep visitors on your site. Put the best one on the home page and make the tour images the same size, preferably a bit larger. Unless you plan on blogging about your trips there seems to be little reason to switch to WordPress.

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

    Thursday, February 14, 2013 12:57 AM
  • Thanks, Sheryl. I have YouTube videos embedded on each tour web page, but not on the home page. I'll look into putting it there too.  Certainly can make the images larger. 

    Elliott

    Thursday, February 14, 2013 2:53 AM
  • Sure, Elliott, Innerfade would do the job quite well. It is lightweight, does not require Flash or any other video plugins of any kind, is viewable on all platforms, can be easily styled using standard CSS, and is SEO-friendly, since the content is standard HTML, and all text (captions, short descriptions, etc.) are present as text in the source code.

    If you take a look at the source code of this example, you can see that the rotation is simply an unordered list of divs (they're not necessary in this application, but provide an additional container for styling). The captions to the rotating images are simple paragraphs in each of the <li>s comprising each item, meaning that those keywords are indexed along with the rest of the page's content. Depending upon how creative you are in writing the copy to accompany each image, you can make a positive, and legitimate, contribution to the keyword density of the page(s).

    I've used Innerfade on several sites now, and it's a piece of cake to implement, free, and offers a lot of design freedom. And you don't need a blog to use it... ;-)

    cheers,
    scott


    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.

    • Marked as answer by BronxinNC Thursday, February 14, 2013 3:21 AM
    Thursday, February 14, 2013 3:07 AM
  • Will try!  thanks everyone. I'll report back in one week.

    Elliott

    Thursday, February 14, 2013 3:22 AM
  • WordPress blows. Sorry, had to get that off my chest; I've been updating a client's WP site lately, and I hate it. The interface and processes are so convulted just because they want to automate things in order to insulate the casual user from getting their hands dirty with code. Just changing a photo on a page is needlessly obtuse. And the Codex is less than accurate, since it is not (IMHO) updated properly to reflect changes in new versions.

    It's all just too opaque for my tastes; I really want more control. I don't want that interface between me and the end product.

    I second the thoughts of using Innerfade (or similar) and embedding the YouTube videos. I will not install anything in order to use a website, so I can't see your slide shows; that's bound to be hurting response. Keep the visitor on your own site.
    I'd suggest a few things:
    I'd standardize the width of all pages (and widen them to 980px--the modern standard--in order to get more copy on the screen or use slightly larger photos without running off the bottom).
    The menu moves slightly on hover; it distracts me, but possibly no one else. It just looks a little swimmy.
    I'd change the font sizing to all ems (descriptors--small, medium, etc.--are interpreted differently by different browsers).
    I would get rid of all justified text; the interword spacing looks odd. Justified text should only be used in print and in conjunction with automatic hyphenation (which the web doesn't yet support). Plus, people read justified text more slowly and remember less of what they read than when the text is simply flush left. Justified text is working against you.
    To feed search engines properly, use semantic markup as it was intended. Headings are not just for sizing quickly, they have meaning to search engines; use them wisely.
    Fix the copyright date. Tsk tsk. ;-) There's javascript code that will update that every year for you.

    All of which is to say that I don't think it needs a huge overhaul (which is the only reason a WordPress switch would make sense--there's no real benefit to you as far as maintaining the site).


    Things Liberal Arts graduates never like to hear:
    “…which means you are going first in Double Jeopardy.”

    Thursday, February 14, 2013 4:51 AM
  • Hi Bill,

    Thank you so much for your very constructive response and analysis.  I will immediately eliminate the text full justification in favor of left justification and standardize page widths to 980px.

    I need some clarification about this that you wrote:  "I second the thoughts of using Innerfade (or similar) and embedding the YouTube videos. I will not install anything in order to use a website, so I can't see your slide shows; that's bound to be hurting response. Keep the visitor on your own site."

    I'm using my self-created YouTube videos on the website.  I didn't realize a viewer needed to install anything to view them.  How can I embed them so that they are on my server as opposed to YouTube's?  Isn't it much easier from a bandwidth and other technical reason to leave it on YouTube?

    Thursday, February 14, 2013 4:51 PM
  • Elliot, your navbar at the top links directly to YouTube for the videos, and the "View our Tour Videos" link at the bottom links to Photodex. Neither is actually embedded in your site. You can embed YouTube videos while keeping them on their server, by use of an iframe. For each video just choose share>embed, select the options you want, then copy the code and paste it into your page. That way visitors can view the videos without navigating away from your site. Who knows how many go to your site, view one of your videos on YouTube, then wander away viewing other suggested videos, and never return to your site.

    Jim


    'Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. Thomas Paine

    Thursday, February 14, 2013 6:13 PM
  • Jim,

    I understand what your saying.  Take a look at my Variety Tour page.  Is the YouTube video on that page embedded as you suggest?  On the home page in the menu bar, I am directing readers to my YouTube channel, so I'm not sure how I could use the iframe there. I'm deleting the Photodex link, since that would require an installation of software. I bet that was what Scott (Paladin) was referring to. 

    Thank you for the advice.

    Elliott

    Thursday, February 14, 2013 8:00 PM
  • I understand what your saying.  Take a look at my Variety Tour page.  Is the YouTube video on that page embedded as you suggest?  On the home page in the menu bar, I am directing readers to my YouTube channel, so I'm not sure how I could use the iframe there. I'm deleting the Photodex link, since that would require an installation of software. I bet that was what Scott (Paladin) was referring to.

    Right. If you're referring to this statement...

    "It is lightweight, does not require Flash or any other video plugins of any kind, is viewable on all platforms, can be easily styled using standard CSS, and is SEO-friendly, since the content is standard HTML, and all text (captions, short descriptions, etc.) are present as text in the source code."

    ... then, yeah, that's what I was talking about. AFAIK, all browsers provide native support for javascript, and since you load the jQuery framework in the page's head section, the user need not install anything to view the effects, making the mechanism of viewing the slideshow completely transparent to the visitor. But, that was for slideshows, not videos.

    As for the YouTube iframe embed for your site, it has the advantage of keeping visitors on your site instead of sending them to YouTube, possibly never to return. It also does not require the visitor to go to the trouble of installing a plugin, like Photodex, or taking them to an unbranded Web page like your Photodex links currently do. Google provides full documentation on using this method, with sample code, which you can use to experiment with in implementing embedded videos on your site.

    FWIW, there is another free jQuery plugin for showing videos in a display similar to the LightBox effect, called prettyPhoto. It works like a champ, and although I have only used it for .swf files, according to this from its home page, it also supports embedding YouTube videos in a LightBox effect:

    “prettyPhoto is a jQuery lightbox clone. Not only does it support images, it also support for videos, flash, YouTube, iframes and ajax. It’s a full blown media lightbox.”

    So, that's another alternative you may wish to explore. In truth, there are many ways to achieve your objective which do NOT require installation of plugins, nor sending visitors away from your branded site, as both the YouTube Channel and Photodex methods do. Just sayin'...  ;-)

    cheers,
    scott


    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.

    • Edited by paladyn Thursday, February 14, 2013 9:00 PM
    • Marked as answer by BronxinNC Friday, February 15, 2013 2:04 AM
    Thursday, February 14, 2013 8:57 PM
  • Elliot, that page is exactly what I meant. It works great and keeps people on your site. I did just notice that the navbar on pages other than the homepage link to Photodex also, so you might want to change that too. As for your YouTube channel, you have six videos there, so it would probably work to make your own videos.htm page with all the videos embedded on it and just link to that. I haven't tested performance of a page with multiple iframe videos, but it should work fine, and would allow you to maintain the same page design and stay on your site. Hopefully someone with more experience will offer an opinion on this option.

    Jim


    'Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. Thomas Paine

    • Marked as answer by BronxinNC Friday, February 15, 2013 2:02 AM
    Thursday, February 14, 2013 9:43 PM
  • Take a look at my Variety Tour page.  Is the YouTube video on that page embedded as you suggest?

    Yep, that's the ticket. I had missed that iframed YouTube video and seen only the links to the YouTube Channel, and to Photodex. So, yeah, that does exactly what you're after, providing the video while keeping the visitor on your own site.

    I agree with Jim about moving those YT Channel videos to your site. Having a single page with multiple videos would work, or you might want to have a page with a descriptive paragraph about each, and maybe an image, which when clicked, launches a lightbox. Something along the lines of this page. When you click any of the "Testimonial Video" links, it opens the video in a lightbox. Now, I used CoffeeCup Video Player to create those videos and controllers, but prettyPhoto says it can also embed YouTube videos, so check it out...

    Like we've been saying all along, there are tons of things you can do to add interactivity, none of which require a blog platform, and which would arguably be more difficult to implement if you were using one.  ;-)

    cheers,
    scott


    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.

    • Marked as answer by BronxinNC Friday, February 15, 2013 2:05 AM
    Thursday, February 14, 2013 10:59 PM
  • BronxinNC,

    Wordpress is like legos, it snaps together nicely and for about 90% of what most websites need, it is fine.  However, when you get into that other 10% it is a nightmare.   If you need to create a page that is slighty different than the others or if you have unique needs you are in trouble.  Have you looked at Coffeecup software?  They have some very simple plugins for html that will do what you want.  Since ALL of wordpress is basicaly a plugin, just go find companies that offer plugins for websites.   It is almost the same thing, and, in the end, you will not need to redesign you site.

    Peter

    • Marked as answer by BronxinNC Friday, February 15, 2013 2:04 AM
    Friday, February 15, 2013 1:12 AM
  • Folks,

    I'm very grateful for and overwhelmed by your critiques and suggestions. I'm already implementing all of the low hanging (i.e.easy) suggestions.  No question I'll stay with my present construct and use some HTML plug-ins rather than going with WordPress.  The consensus of this group is obvious. Thanks again, everyone.

    Elliott

    Friday, February 15, 2013 1:43 AM
  • Hi Everyone,

    I would like to thank everyone for their suggestions. I've taken the past week to implement suggestions.

    --all pages are now 980px wide

    --larger images on Home Page

    --All YouTube videos are embeded; viewers are no longer taken to the YouTube site as before on Home Page

    --A Photo (Photos) Gallery using JAlbum has been embeded

    Again, thank you! Did I miss anything?

    Elliott

    http://www.costaricatoursltd.com/

    Wednesday, February 20, 2013 2:22 PM
  • You still need to fix the navbar on other pages. On the Calendar page the Videos link goes to YouTube, and on the Tours page it goes to Photodex. You also should look at using a DWT for consistency, as some pages have different widths and other variations. A DWT would greatly simplify making site-wide updates or styling changes. Other than that, looks like it's coming together nicely.

    Jim


    'Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. Thomas Paine

    • Marked as answer by BronxinNC Wednesday, February 20, 2013 8:51 PM
    Wednesday, February 20, 2013 6:11 PM
  • Thanks, Jim. Made corrections. Will consider DWT.

    Elliott

    Wednesday, February 20, 2013 8:52 PM
  • I'm still seeing the old site and I can't pull up the new one in any browser. Did you take it down? Try as I might (clearing cache, opening in a browser that's never been to your site, etc.) I can't see the new site.

    Anyway, 2 things I don't know if I mentioned before...

    The Navigation needs to be the same on every page. You can't have links coming and going in the navigation bar. That drives people batty.

    The text is hugely different sizes in different browsers due to using descriptors to set the size (small, medium, etc.) I tried to post a screen shot, but this forum software won't cooperate. The text in Safari (including in the masthead) is 20% smaller than in Firefox. Both browsers were set to display text at their defaul;t setting.


    Things Liberal Arts graduates never like to hear:
    “…which means you are going first in Double Jeopardy.”

    Thursday, February 21, 2013 3:21 AM
  • Bill,

    What makes you think you are seeing the old site?  The changes mentioned are there.

    Thursday, February 21, 2013 6:21 AM
  • Bill,

    I'm unsure as to the reason you are still seeing the old version.  The old home page was renamed indexold.htm and the new one is index.htm.  The link is http://www.costaricatoursltd.com/

    Yes, someone suggested that I use ems instead of small, medium, etc.  Does it matter if the text size varies from browser to browser if within each browser all sizes are consistent with each other.  I test out in Safari, Safari on iOS, Google Chrome, Opera, IE 10, and Firefox.  The webpages look similar in all of them to me.  Maybe I can't see the 20% difference.  In my revised version I did try to bring more consistency page by page to the navigation bar, but have a little way to go.  Thanks for the feedback. I'll be looking at the differences between browsers more carefully.

    Elliott

    Thursday, February 21, 2013 12:46 PM
  • Because the site I see is still exactly 900px wide and he said he widened all the pages to 980px. 

    And I still can't post a screen shot this morning comparing the two browsers (with screen ruler included). Ugh.


    Things Liberal Arts graduates never like to hear:
    “…which means you are going first in Double Jeopardy.”

    Thursday, February 21, 2013 12:49 PM
  • Bill,

    The formatting for the page is in my default.css page which has this code:

    body {
        margin: 20px auto 30px auto;
        font-family: "Tahoma Helvetica", sans-serif;
        background-color: #DADEA4;
        padding: 0;
        color: #000000;
        width: 980px;

    That's where I changed the 900 to 980.  How can I tell what the page is actually?

    Elliott

    Thursday, February 21, 2013 3:55 PM
  • I am using Screen Calipers. A nifty little application for measuring things on-screen.

    Mike

    Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:26 PM
  • Mike,

    I downloaded the calipers, and you are correct that my homepage is about 900px.  All the other pages seem to be 980px.  I'll go back into the default.css file and see why it says 980 and I'm only getting 900.

    Elliott 

    Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:07 PM
  • Problem resolved. I needed to change container to 980.  Thank you!
    Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:16 PM
  • Mike,

    Now that I've gotten the size correct thanks to your calipers, can you do me a favor and look at my images on the home page. My monitor is not calibrated, and my screen is set pretty dark.  Do they look OK?

    Elliott

    Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:52 PM
  • You can calibrate your monitor with the monitor calibration tools built into Windows. Is it pro-quality calibration? Nope. But it gets you in the ballpark.

    There are lots of screen rulers available. I use 3 (for different things), the calipers that Mike uses and JRuler (for quick checks in different modes), and I forget the other one (different computer than I'm on right now).


    Things Liberal Arts graduates never like to hear:
    “…which means you are going first in Double Jeopardy.”

    Thursday, February 21, 2013 7:36 PM
  • I use the MeasureIt extension for Firefox and there's a little free program called Sizer that will let you see what the size is when you drag any browser and you can preset it to specific sizes for testing how your page will render at different screen resolutions. Handy little tool that comes in very useful when I'm taking screen shots or recording video.

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

    Thursday, February 21, 2013 9:07 PM