|The content of Production Website was merged into Web development on March 22, 2015. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see ; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.|
Rewrite of Web Development and Web Design articles
The current articles for Web development and Web design have been listed in Category:Wikipedia_articles_needing_rewrite. To facilitate this process, I am creating subpages of the Talk pages for the each article, named Web development (rewrite) and Web design (rewrite). Initially these two pages will be stubs only, while I take stock of the existing material offline. I hope to post some progress before the end of 2006.
My plan is to improve the content in four stages:
- Provide a high level taxonomy of the subject area;
- Reorganize the existing content according to that structure;
- Edit and improve the existing material where appropriate;
- Add missing material where it's needed.
That is the plan; in its execution, there will be some overlap within steps 2-4. And we can actually decide to replace the existing pages at any time after stage #2 is complete.
If you want to contribute content or suggestions, then please use the (rewrite) pages only for proposed new or updated content which is intended to eventually replace the existing pages. All discussion should be placed on the two talk pages. During the rewrite process, any internal links between the two artcles should use the names with the (rewrite) extensions. If the structure is right, I don't anticipate having too many such cross-references. So I plan to edit them manually when we eventually replace the current articles.
Chris Loosley 22:23, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Wikibooks article on Web Development
As of December 27, 2006, the Wikibooks article on Web development consists mostly of a taxonomy of the subject area. However, since I do not agree with a lot of it, I am not going to reproduce it in this Wikipedia article rewrite. But I am also not volunteering to edit anything in Wikibooks. If this inconsistency causes problems, please raise them here. Chris Loosley 02:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Relationship to other articles
I view Web development as a particular instance of a Software development process, which is itself a Wikipedia category comprising many articles. I intend to reflect these relationships in the structure and content of the rewritten article. Chris Loosley 03:45, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Distinction between development process and methodology
I know that many informal approaches to Web development do not identify as distinct activities each task of the more formal software development processes. Nonetheless, I believe that a formal software development process identifies a collection of tasks that are essential to the production of effective software. So while people may adopt many different methodologies (or approaches) for addressing the work, those essential tasks must still be performed -- somehow, by someone -- during any development process. By addressing this distinction in the rewrite, I plan to cover both small-scale and large-scale Web development. Chris Loosley 03:45, 27 December 2006 (UTC). Website development companies have now also started using the agile development methodology for development, along with the more popular traditional waterfall methodology.
The picture at the top of this article is ridiculous. Two guys in front of a computer that is being used for some ambiguous task has little to do with web development. Obviously, you need sentient beings to do web development and they probably would be using a computer, but, that seriously doesn't warrant the use of the current image.
- I agree because I don't see how web development can be properly illustrated, specially using a photo with two guys looking at a screen. --Goa103 20:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
"15:28, 5 February 2006 Reisio (rv last - no way in hell :p)" Why? Those are all good web development links taken from http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=DesignerDeveloperBlogs --Emil Stenström 18:23, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- Well, let's take a little survey...
- Douglas Bowman
- This is a personal design site, so it's advertising whether intended or not. Looking at his front page right now I see information about a Mac OS X program, stuff about odd jobs he's had in the past, and some personal stuff about hurting his back.
- Andy Budd
- Oooh, ads and selling of books...with a little something about Apple (computer) stuff, some stuff he had in the past, a survey about what it takes to be a "web design superhero".
- Dan Cederholm
- Four things again (both Bowman and Budd had this, too), information about ukuleles, a lot of personal information, links to books he's written which you can purchase (big surprise) and oh...he mentions HTML - ya he talks about how he switched from using
- Mike Davidson
- This blog, described as "a running commentary of occasionally interesting things" (not web design), has the typical portfolio and personal advertising stuff as well as...some stuff about Google Maps, an entry on the 'four things' thing condemning them, but still wasting space talking about them, stuff about iPod giveaways, and some stuff about "Newsvine" - something with a website that explains jack.
- Jon Hicks
- Another design site (meaning the main purpose is to generate work). On the front page we have a list of clients and recent jobs. On the "journal", we have what looks like the same Apple iTunes plugging that Budd had, stuff about kilts, and another entry on memes (like the 'four things' everyone above has an entry on).
- Molly Holzschlag
- French people are mean, Flash is silly, it's so tough flying around the world and being insulted, spam is bad...'four things' _again_, how blogging is a PITA, and a whole bunch of other stuff not even worth mentioning.
- Roger Johansson
- Internet Explorer is bad, 'four things' YET again, announcement about awards for blogs...go figure, personal stuff, stuff about Apple hardware, a bunch of ads and invitations to pay him.
- Eric Meyer
- IE7 is a PITA, jet lag, 'four things' EVEN YET again, a bunch of useless personal stuff and big surprise some more stuff about Apple wares.
- Dave Shea
- Emil Stenström
- Whoa, 'four things' - again? Big surprise. Portfolio & CV to sell work, mimicing frames, chatting about code.google.com, poker websites.
- Simon Willison
- Jeffrey Zeldman
- Plugging alistapart.com, 'four things' (I'm serious, yet again), iTunes stuff (yet again), a few _links_ to information on buzzwords, XHTML & CSS, and Flash, plugging books, and a lot more ALA propaganda.
- What we've learned (in order of importance, most important first):
- How to put money in these people's pockets by just giving it to them or hiring them or buying their books, etc.
- A lot of personal information, with a recurring theme of jet lag complaining and a goofy 'internet meme' usually called 'four things'
- Apple and iTunes are great, yippee go get them!
- Google stuff is neat - go look at it!
- Internet Explorer is stupid
- Flash is stupid
- Now...I admit, knowing that IE & Flash are stupid is useful information - but we could just put that in the article. Everything else that might be considered useful that is actually in-depth is completely dwarfed by the irrelevant rest.
- m:When should I link externally#Blog links: when? has a good comment about this, too. ¦ Reisio 21:36, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
reisio:, I agree that in general, blog links don't belong here. However, even with personal posts here and there, those bloggers are driving much of the innovation in the web industry today. They are certainly not the kinds of blogs JFW refers to on the page you reference. I think giving beginners who are interested a list of good blogs to learn from is not a bad idea. Perhaps a List of web professional's blogs (or something) would be a better place? Also, Emil:, it's generally considered bad form to post self-promoting links. Even if you do post lists of standards bloggers, let someone else put you in if they think it's appropriate. - Crenner 05:54, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
- Eh...I might consider Hicks & Meyer as innovative influences, the rest are just bloggers. ¦ Reisio 20:29, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
- @Crenner: yes, that was stupid of me. @Reisio: I think they are all personal _and_ web development bloggers but I see if you only want sources that are only dedicated to the subject at hand. Thanks for a good explaination. --Emil Stenström 20:44, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
I added the link to Web Developer Resource Index. For the rest of the editors of this page, please have a look and contact me if you have reservations. I think it's appropriate. Please take a little time and not just a cursory glance. Also, I'd be happy to contribute to this page, and there are some grammatical errors that need fixing. DClifton 21:30, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Time Specific Information
The following statement "The web development industry is expected to grow over 20% over the next 5 years" has no citation and no indication of when this statement was made. 5 years from what date? --Bradley Holt 23:59, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Hundreds of dollars?!
Keke mokone from Koppies (KWAKWATSI) is now the best web developer ever!
"you can now develop a website with only a few hundred dollars." - this is surely incorrect - web sites can be developed with FAR less than a few hundred dollars!
Above is an example of someone who has never designed a website. Think about purely mathmatically if you design websites for $100 each you will have to design 400 websites a year. That just isn't possible.
- He said "develop a website with" less than a few hundred dollars, not "develop for". There's a difference between the cost of designing a website and the amount the designer needs to charge to support him/herself. I think the above commentator is trying to say that you don't need to have hundreds of dollars to design a website yourself. You can probably use free tools and cheap hosting to develop a website for less than $100.
- Actually there is a divergence. It is getting cheaper for an amateur to develop an amateur site because the WYSIWYG tools are getting better and cheaper. At the same time the cost of a serious, professionally-developed site is increasing at a substantial rate (not counting the pick-a-template sort of providers.) A distinction should be made here between do-it-yourself activities and the sort of work done by professionals. Else it is easily misleading.
Random contributor: It is not Wikipedia's job to define the markets equilibrium price for Web development. And if you do so, cite sources. You are guessing at what the real value of development is. I charge £200 per day working for an SME. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 07:59, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Web development may be related to websites or an intranet, yet it is more related to the user end comprehension of transmitted data between computers, and the compatibility of communications or end results, meaning that attempts to display any information accessed on the web will look the same from any other access point. The entire article is written in a way that will tend to lead unfamiliar readers to think that web development is all about websites and website development. Websites and website development are components of web development, certainly not the primary functionality, or priority.
The World Wide Web is more of a software program distributed through the Internet. Future websites will exist outside the WWW or Http in the advent of new communication technologies that communicate information between computers differently than preset methods.
When the cost of a website is mentioned.... yes, a website can be created for less than a thousand dollars. More accurately, the cost of access to the internet.
To more accurately and appropriately give web development the credit it deserves, a history of the meaning of the word web, and that it was considered a birth from hypertext, leading to HTTP://WWW, might help establish it's origin and vast nature.
This article needs some serious work. The initial paragraph is okay(ish), but the Web Development as an industry section needs serious work, at the moment it's just an undiffentiated block of text. The focus on the history of web development is also a little weird - I suggest that that could be sepearted out into it's own subheading.
The see also section is way too long. I suggest splitting it into sections. Artw 17:46, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure splitting it would improve it. I think most internal links should be removed. For example instead of listing programming languages like Java and PHP, we could simply write "Programming languages are used to implement...". See the External links for more info. So sad there isn't a See also article yet. I'm planning to write one for the french Wikipedia. --Goa103 21:12, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
- Nonetheless, I've split it up a little bit and added a small section on security. In my opinion, it looks much easier to read for now. Hopefully others will feel the same! 220.127.116.11 13:36, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Web development process
Well, what would we like to see in this article? I personally would like to know more about the lifecycle process. For example, I have enough software development experience to know about different development methodologies. But I don't have enough web development experience to know about the process that web development teams typically use. DRogers 19:46, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- It;d be pretty hard to generalise. Aproaches I've seen vary from attempts at Agile, to badly implemented waterfall model to no methodology at all. In general I'd say the lighter-wight and less formal a methodolgy is the more useful is likely to be in a web dev enviroment, but that if you have no method at all your project will end up in development hell forever. That;s just personal observation of course. Artw 20:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Web development processes are widely used by french web development companies and I'm sure foreign companies use them as well. Their use is not obvious on minor projects like a personal websites but when it comes to web applications or portals, web development is as complex as software development. That's why processes are important. For example Pascal Roques wrote the UML : Modéliser un site e-commerce (UML : Design and develop an e-commerce website) book where he explains how the Unified Process (UP) can be used to better manage web development projects, to apply software development processes to the Web. An other of his books even introduced us to the 2TUP process, a lightweight version of UP. Jim Conallen also wrote Building Web Applications with UML and I think Pascal Roques largely got his knowledge from this book, as it was one of the first to take up the topic. Note that eXtreme Programming (XP) is also an other widely used development process, both for softwares and web applications. Applying XP to the Web is covered in the french l'eXtreme Programming : Avec deux études de cas (XP : With two case studies) book but I'm sure one of Kent Beck's books took up the topic first. Also note that there's no need for a Web development process article because softwares were there first. The main differences I see between software and web development is that you use different tools and technologies, and that the media is different. Softwares are for the desktop, web applications for the Web. But as the Web is getting more and more mature every year, I'm sure there will soon be no differences between the two worlds. David and Goliath ? --Goa103 21:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
- Also, given the much quicker pace of the web world, agile methods seem more suited than traditional, more formal and ceremonial methods. DRogers 12:16, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- This Web Project Life Cycle that may add some value to this article. It addresses a web project at a higher level and doesn't get into the detailed specifics of any given technology. It's a good resources for steps marketers should consider when undertaking a web project. Adkoon 22:20, June 4, 2008 (PST)
Web Development should be categorized. Suggestions?
- That's a tricky question because in english it seems Web design and development stands for Web creation. In french we have the Conception de sites Web (Websites creation) article for it. It's even trickier because Conception can also mean Design in an other context. Moreover design is more related to the visual appeal (Graphics, CSS...), not the backend. Worst it seems most people don't make any differences between Web development and programming. IMHO programming is part of developing. So Web development includes designing and programming Web applications (Services, websites...). The same goes for software development. First you design, then you program (implement). So I think the article should have its own category, like the Web design article as the Web design category. The idea would be to create categories like Web development, Web programming... I think separating topics is important, as it's essential to separate the presentation from the business logic for example. --Goa103 21:55, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Merge with Web application development ?
Image missing WHATWG
File:Web_development_timeline.png shows XHTML2 WG as the last action of W3C. XHTML2 WG is effectively dead (they're wrapping up some last non-XHTML bits). WHATWG and HTML5 WG needs to be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 13:34, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
File:Web_development_timeline.png shows Ruby as being drafted 10 years before its first release!. This is ridiculous.22.214.171.124 (talk) 08:17, 6 August 2010 (UTC)craig .dot fairhurst@ youds.com File:Web_development_timeline.png shows AJAX as being "possible" in 1996 when it was not so, as browser uptake of XMLHttpRequest was not wide spread enough.
Merge with Web engineering
Edit request on 2 May 2013
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
Links to other language Wiki pages
Could an editor please add the foreign language wiki links? Here is the page in Spanish for example: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desarrollo_web — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 01:36, 3 June 2013 (UTC)