Wow, those reflections are pretty effing cool!

Right back at ya! - like - WOW!

If nothing else iWeb does deffo make some very sexy images!

Has anyone out there got hold of a copy yet?..

Big G

Does it require a .mac subscription ?

It does not require a .mac subscription. There is an option which allows you to export your iWeb project to a folder.

Dan K. Who cares if it produces valid XHTML. The code is still terrible.

As an alternative for quick and easy, look at RapidWeaver, which sounds like it has a bit more flexibility for amateur coders.

As a web designer, you’re right, the code is ugly. But have you ever opened up a Word document in pico after changing it to .txt. Does it matter that it’s incomprehensible? This isn’t for coders, even amateur ones. This is for my mom and dad. And for that, it’s great. And if it’s valid xhtml, then wow! That’s awesome.

David

Dave, it does not matter who the software is for. The html uses way too many divs. The CSS is inline (and is “a redundant mess").

Yes, the code is “ugly"… but come on, it validates! The primary point of web standards is NOT to turn code into an art project, nor is it to make code easy to read by anyone who feels like it. It’s to be widely compatible. And while the code does indeed look like crap, it still meets the web standards. Period.

Oh, and that’s something that Apple did not have to do. I think it’s a miracle in itself that you can drag any damn thing you want around and it will still produce validating code, no matter how much junk you put on your site.

Jerry, I see why a coder such as yourself would be unhappy with this, but come on, you really think this is a WORSE alternative than some lamer using GoLive or Word or some online pagebuilder that will throw tables and javascript around like juggling pins? You can alter the templates to the end of time and will still come up with a site that validates. That to me seems like a breakthrough in software coding.

I haven’t yet gotten a glance at the app but my guess is we’ll be able to make our own templates with cleaner code.

And in that case you could probably save a blank page as a template, thus getting that function mentioned to be missing.

( Code should not look pretty! But no one minds if it does )

“Yes, the code is ?¢‚Ǩ?ìugly?¢‚Ǩ?… but come on, it validates!”

Dan… it validates, but it is still wrong. With XHTML you can’t have inline styles like that. The only reason it validates is because Apple uses the XHTML transitional mime type.  Apple could have done MUCH better and everyone knows it.