Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jonathan lall
To address chakorules', comments I understand where he's coming from -- the ultimate goal here of course is to build marketable skills -- although as he pointed out, the question we are framing here is with regard specifically to the Website Award. To add to what he said, we should note that after all, no backend technology in and of itself is a sufficient condition for this ultimate goal, or for that matter sufficient for an objectively "good" (i.e. irrespective of FIRST's slightly i'll-conceived criteria) website. In my experience, the non-CMS websites that win -- and most of the winners were in fact non-CMS, or at least cleverly disguised the fact that they used a premade backend -- created their own backend and used every one of the technologies above that you listed, only they often made it themselves (for those that don't believe me, there are lists of the winners available). This is why I contended earlier that making a site by my lonely with no CMS taught me much more (and I'm sure many other webmasters would agree), and also raised the bar for what I would achieve. Also, not having to decipher someone else's programming in order to make my site do what I wanted (but rather programming it myself) catalyzed this creative process. |
I would have to agree with this one hundred percent. When I made the first version of my team's website a year ago, I used the WYSIWYG editor in FrontPage 2003. Then, after reaching my limits in that, I decided to totally redo the entire website by hard-coding the entire thing. It is only after one hand-codes over thirty thousand lines of XHTML, CSS, and Javascript that one learns and appreciates what PHP/ASP can do.
