Where the design community meets.
Freelance Web Developer Joined about 7 years ago
This seems cool. It looks like a embeddable Webflow, which sounds great to me. But as a developer I would not pay for it if I cannot read what result Finch produces and the API it exposes.
I totally agree: this tool is just a time saver to build templates according to modern website standards, not to revolutionize web design. Yet is it a reason to hate Webflow? ;-)
I know how to use Photoshop but, maybe because I am a developer and not a designer, I do not want to use it when I am building a template. These two steps (design in Photoshop then integrate it in HTML/CSS3) make me feel like I am wasting my time and should do it directly using code, as if I would do the same thing twice. I certainly am wrong but this is how I feel about this process. Webflow is something in-between: the template I make using Webflow is directly usable, even if it must be tweaked after export.
Ten years from now I used Dreamweaver, when building a layout with tables was not a problem at all, and I do understand what you meant about sense of code behind the templates. Dreamweaver definitively taught me a lot about HTML and CSS. The Dreamweaver version I used is not that different from Webflow, except Webflow enables building modern designs without coding a single line, just placing HTML elements then setting properties to them, as you would with Photoshop, then easily exporting your project in code.
Disclaimer: I am a web developer, not a designer.
I am not an intensive user of Webflow. In fact, I have learned about this web app a few weeks ago.
Yet I already have recommended it to a designer friend who is using Illustrator/Photoshop to design his templates. Why? Source code clearly scares him. I don't blame him. And even if he became HTML/CSS3 fluent, he surely would spend much time to achieve his templates using code only. So why would he change his way? Webflow looks like a Photoshop fork, which clearly may reassure him, and may give him a better feel of what can be done or not in pure HTML and CSS3 combination. His way to communicate with developers/integrators would definitively be improved. Plus, using this tool, he would be able to sell ready-to-use templates, so increase his pricing.
As a frontend developer and integrator, I know how to turn Illustrator/Photoshop templates to HTML pages and stylesheets. But I am not a designer while I really am interested in web design. I have made templates "just" coding them. Some of them were bad, some were just not too ugly. Maybe I am not creative enough (which is clearly possible), but I feel that only using code to achieve templates slows down creativity process. Webflow may be a game changer, as it enables building layouts in a breeze.
You are right: I would not be able to do whatever I want with this tool. But does it really matter? In my opinion it's just a tool among the many ones I daily use that may speed up templating workflow (which is what I want from it, referring the Steven Hawking's quote).
Thank you for your answer. But it does not seem to work actually, or maybe I was not clear enough: the scrollable content here is partially hidden when the header and/or the footer heights increase. The result I expect is that the content div adapt its height to completely fill the space left between the header and the footer, but the header and the footer must not hide the content.
Thanks for your explanation! I think it's clearer in my mind now. Actually, as you wrote at the end of your comment, the browser does not draw one ellipsis (or circle) but four ellispes (or circles), and renders the corners using arcs of generated ellipses. That was a part of my misunderstanding.
Thank for your answer, but it does not seem clear enough to me. I still do not understand why the browser renders my JSFiddle buttons differently. To go a little bit further, is there a way to render the "absolute-unit" button the same way as the "percentage-unit" button?
Where the design community meets.
Designer News is a large, global community of people working or interested in design and technology.