Talk:Microsoft Expression Web

message: Just how standards compliant is it? After the disaster that was FrontPage, I'm a bit skeptical. Can anybody point to a site that was created with it?
If it actually is standards-compliant, Microsoft ought to have the Expression Web team working on IE 8 so I can stop having recurring nightmares about jumping links and invalid box models…
Wulf 02:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: i was on their product page. the page is orrible in opera9.5 beta 2 --> changing the doctype to something not standard solfes the problems :rolleyes: mabdul 0=* 19:53, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just How Standards Compliant Is It? 

message: It is and it isn't, however a lot of websites use it. Although I don't use it, it probably isn't such a bad technology after all. Don't judge a book by its cover. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.185.228.187 (talk) 23:49, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: flat out it is not a standard, I am not calling it bad it is uniform due to it is produced by one company it just is not a standard.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.192.214.179 (talk) 08:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ASP.NET 

message: Anyone else thing that "Expression Web is focused on the needs of professional Web designers seeking to build high-quality, standards-based Web sites for companies" sound more like an advert than an encyclopaedia? Simxp 03:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Although I'm the first always to point at Microsoft's faults there is such a thing as a de facto standard. ASP is second only to PHP and is taught officially in more places, as well as being a requirement for Web development in a lot of corporations so, as much as it pains us to admit it, it is a standard. Just not an open one. Remember, we don't like 'em but we can't let that cloud our judgement. Oracle is also closed and it's a standard. eduo (talk) 21:01, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: While the statement about the advertisement is accurate, justifying it with "according to the official blurb" is somewhat unprofessional.  You would not see "the official blurb" in Brittanica.  I've changed it to "according to Microsoft."--199.125.45.10 (talk) 14:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marketing babble 

message: I have removed the following sentences from the intro paragraphs.
::Ironically, Microsoft's Internet Explorer cannot render strict standards-based websites correctly. Also, ASP.NET is the only server-side supported language, an important standard such as PHP is not supported.
While these criticisms may or may not be valid, I do not believe that they belong in the intro paragraph. (Especially the first sentence, which is nothing more than a cheap shot at IE.) Viltris 19:45, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms in intro section 

message: I removed the criticism section. It feels like WP:NOR to me.
ASP.NET is as much a "standard" as PHP. Each one is the predominant dynamic server technology on their respective platforms (Windows/.NET or Unix/PHP.)
:both are commonly used and are capable scripting languages but ASP.NET is not a standard (In the sense of ANSI C or ISO/IEC 23360 are standards, approved by a national or international standards body), it is however uniform in syntax due to it only has one company that has developed it. The argument that ASP.NET is as standard as PHP is a little ironic in I do not believe that it has gone through a standardization process with any national or international standards body either.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.192.214.179 (talk) 08:25, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism section 

message: I removed sentences "Expression Web is targeted toward professional website designers." - with a product like this one, the target group is quite obvious. The word 'proffessional' is, on the other hand, a quite obvious marketing move with no encyclopaedic significance whatsoever. 
"Microsoft claims that Expression Web's rendering engine currently provides the most accurate standards-compliant rendering on the market,[2] especially CSS rendering." - what else would Microsoft claim? "We've made a lame rendering engine"? If there are results of some independent tests available, add a link to those. But referencing Microsoft's product page for a boasting claim like that is ... naive at best. 
wlad 78.98.0.167 (talk) 09:40, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marketing yadda yadda again 

message: FleetCommand asked me to start a discussion on whether Expression Web is a WYSIWYG editor. I removed the passage FleetCommand wrote claiming it is not one. I found hundreds of published sources claiming that it is a WYSIWYG editor: . In contrast, the only source FleetCommand can find is a posting in a forum by someone named "Bill Pearson." If I were to resort to using web sites as sources, too, I would find thousands that say it is a WYSIWYG editor: . It took me a few seconds to find that information. I have a feeling FleetCommand spent longer than that digging up that posting in that forum, though.--Best Dog Ever (talk) 20:40, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expression Web is a WYSIWYG Editor 

message: With EW Version 4 getting long in the tooth (now 19 months old) and HTML 5 emerging is there any reliable outlook on a next version with increased HTML support? Thanks! --Lbeaumont (talk) 22:52, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Expression Web 4, Service Pack 2 does support HTML 5. The service pack is a free download from Microsoft.--Best Dog Ever (talk) 05:49, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  HTML 5 Outlook 

message: It would be better if the introduction was slightly clearer about what Expression Web is. The article didn't help me. It was only after reading https://www.computerhope.com/jargon/e/expression-web.htm that I understood. Mcljlm (talk) 00:02, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: Why does the sentence beginning "my page talk about fashion" appear above the Contents box? Mcljlm (talk) 00:06, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irrelevance on this page 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Microsoft Expression Web. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://archive.is/20120530162906/http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/products/review-microsoft-expression-web-3-html-editor/674 to http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/products/?p=674
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110612063330/http://tlt.its.psu.edu/suggestions/international/web/tips/expressionweb.html to http://tlt.its.psu.edu/suggestions/international/web/tips/expressionweb.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121224235356/http://designisphilosophy.com/microsoft-expression-web/microsoft-abandons-expression-web-and-front-end-web-development/ to http://designisphilosophy.com/microsoft-expression-web/microsoft-abandons-expression-web-and-front-end-web-development/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:46, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified