Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Developer Center > What do web developers use to create webpages with?

What do web developers use to create webpages with?
Thread Tools
apostacy
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2005, 07:55 PM
 
Easy question: what do web developers use to create webpages with? Dreamweaver? I've used the one that comes with the Netscape browser, though that seems a little slow. Is there something cheaper and not so fancy? I'm talking about just what Mac programmers either (though I realize that when talking about a *web* developer, the OS is not an issue except regarding what platform runs on.)
MacBook 2.4 GHz
Mac OS X 10.5.8
     
selowitch
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2005, 08:16 PM
 
I have used both NetObjectsFusion and Dreamweaver. Although both make certain tasks, like building JavaScript navigation bars, somewhat quicker and easier, they are best used as ways to teach you to ultimately give up the WYSIWYG editors in favor of hand-coding. Learn the w3c standards and write your pages with XHTML/CSS, then branch out to a scripting language like PHP paired with a backend like MySQL. You can then leave NOF and DW behind for good.
( Last edited by selowitch; Sep 15, 2005 at 11:54 PM. )
     
Simon Mundy
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2005, 09:33 PM
 
I use blood, sweat, tears and a drop or two of Victoria Bitter. YMMV
Computer thez nohhh...
     
budster101
Baninated
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Illinois might be cold and flat, but at least it's ugly.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2005, 10:28 PM
 
Microsoft Word
Frontpage
...



...

Dreamweaver is a great product, well it is now.
     
MaxPower
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Ze goggles, zey do nothing
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2005, 11:24 PM
 
I'd like to have a pared down one like how Homesite/ColdFusion Studio was. Just give me code completion, code snippets, find/replace with regex, and the site upload sidebar. Column editing like SubEthaEdit would be cool too.
     
jay3ld
Senior User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2005, 11:39 PM
 
98% of the time i go with the basic... hand coding php language.
im to poor to buy expensive programs and such... if i get them its because a friend upgraded so i just ask for there old codes
     
CanadaRAM
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2005, 12:57 AM
 
Originally Posted by jay3ld
98% of the time i go with the basic... hand coding php language.
im to poor to buy expensive programs and such... if i get them its because a friend upgraded so i just ask for there old codes
which is, of course, a license violation...
     
Phil Sherry
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2005, 01:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by Simon Mundy
I use blood, sweat, tears and a drop or two of Victoria Bitter. YMMV
+ Absolut Vodka.

Hey, it's a local brew, I'm just helping the economy!
     
wataru
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2005, 02:20 AM
 
It's called a "text editor."
     
Jasoco
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Home in front of my computer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2005, 04:29 AM
 
Taco HTML Edit.
     
PurpleGiant
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2005, 04:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by Phil Sherry
+ Absolut Vodka.

Hey, it's a local brew, I'm just helping the economy!
Always there to support the locals in their alcohol consumption. Mundy: I find I'm more productive with a Draught than VB.
     
Partisan01
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2005, 12:38 PM
 
skEdit.....
Apple iBook, B&W, Quadra 660, PowerMac 6100
Sun Netra T1, Ultra 1, Javastation
http://natetobik.mine.nu:81
     
Millennium
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2005, 01:20 PM
 
Uncut, raw hand-coded HTML, done up in TextWrangler with BBTidy. I used SubEthaEdit before that (before it went shareware), and Pepper before that (the first editor of its kind to be ported to OSX). I still miss some of Pepper's features, but I gave up hope on its being updated long ago; someone purchased the source but they haven't done anything with it since then.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
exca1ibur
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Oakland, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2005, 03:25 PM
 
TextWrangler. I haven't used a visual editor in about 5 years. I find it faster and more accurate to do by hand.
     
mdc
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NY²
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2005, 04:56 PM
 
smultron
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2005, 06:19 PM
 
SubEthaEdit.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
dampeoples
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Youngsville, NC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2005, 08:55 PM
 
I use Freeway Express for my hobby sites.
     
waxcrash
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2005, 09:04 PM
 
I started with GoLive years ago. Now I use BBEdit.
     
mania
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Durango CO
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2005, 10:52 PM
 
ya, bbedit or textwrangler.

pepper was nice.

skedit is nice but too slow on big files.

whatever you do, don't use dreamONweaver, frontRage or goEvil. your code will become difficult to read, maintain, search, or pass validation. go with XHTML 1.1 strict and put all your styles in a separate style sheet. make accessiblity a priority. do not burden the web with image rollovers, flash, or java. flash is okay for a movie since it is more cross platform than anything else. some good javascript is ok. as was mentioned PHP is a good language to use for server side scripting. its not okay to use tables for layout any longer - use divs and learn about css. hmm, there is probably more i am forgetting. so much to know these days.
The Bitcastle
graphic design, web development, hosting
     
loren s
Senior User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2005, 01:29 PM
 
taco taco taco!

Hand codeing sucks dirt but there are no good tools out there
     
CaptainHaddock
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Nagoya, Japan • 日本 名古屋市
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2005, 02:22 PM
 
I use skEdit (www.skti.org) for professional work. The code hinting saves a lot of time.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 12:02 AM
 
Originally Posted by mania
ya, bbedit or textwrangler.

pepper was nice.

skedit is nice but too slow on big files.

whatever you do, don't use dreamONweaver, frontRage or goEvil. your code will become difficult to read, maintain, search, or pass validation. go with XHTML 1.1 strict and put all your styles in a separate style sheet. make accessiblity a priority. do not burden the web with image rollovers, flash, or java. flash is okay for a movie since it is more cross platform than anything else. some good javascript is ok. as was mentioned PHP is a good language to use for server side scripting. its not okay to use tables for layout any longer - use divs and learn about css. hmm, there is probably more i am forgetting. so much to know these days.

I was reading something a while back that said something about how some browsers (i.e. IE) have difficulty with some of the more advanced XHTML, and developers have ended up using a sort of bastardized HTML 4/XHTML hybrid.

If you look at many commercial sites, including Apple, they are still HTML 4. I don't think we're quite ready yet to switch over to XHTML, although admittedly, I haven't researched this extensively. I'm probably most reticent to learn something new because I've become so good at using embedded tables.
     
budster101
Baninated
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Illinois might be cold and flat, but at least it's ugly.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 07:52 AM
 
IE < Not W3C...
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 11:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by budster101
IE < Not W3C...

IE is less than not W3C?
     
as2
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Northants, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 01:29 PM
 
I've just designed my first site, and while those of you who are fluent in XHTML probably make your site do exactly what you want, straight away, I've created mine using Fireworks and Dreamweaver.

Put together a site design graphically in Fireworks, and then chopped it up and took it into Dreamweaver to add the content.

It's probably not the quickest way to make a site, or the cleanest. It's also not going to be a very dialup friendly site, but from my point of view...

It works.
It looks good!

www.computherapy.co.uk

Adam
[img=http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/1300/desktj.jpg]
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 01:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by as2
I've just designed my first site, and while those of you who are fluent in XHTML probably make your site do exactly what you want, straight away, I've created mine using Fireworks and Dreamweaver.

Put together a site design graphically in Fireworks, and then chopped it up and took it into Dreamweaver to add the content.

It's probably not the quickest way to make a site, or the cleanest. It's also not going to be a very dialup friendly site, but from my point of view...

It works.
It looks good!

www.computherapy.co.uk

Adam

I don't know if you are aware, but there is a big unintended gap that appears within Safari. I could post a screenshot if you can't reproduce this because you aren't running the latest Safari.

This is exactly the problem with editors like Dreamweaver, Frontpage, GoLive, etc... they produce horrible code. Sometimes the sites "work", but it makes life difficult for everybody when sites are built out of sloppy code. Moreover, search engines like Google will assign a higher page ranking to pages that are coded cleanly. If you are concerned with how the site does in Google, I also recommend looking at the pages through a text-only browser such as Links (you can install this automatically through DarwinPorts).

At some point, I'd suggest going in there and cleaning up the code. Perhaps you can use what Dreamweaver/Fireworks created as a starting point.

The line possibly causing the problem is this one:

Code:
<td height="50%" background="images/mainback.png"><table width="740" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
It generally isn't wise to mix absolute sizes with relative ones (or vice versa).
     
registered_user
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Are Eye
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 05:04 PM
 
I use skEdit and Text Wrangler personally.


Originally Posted by besson3c
I was reading something a while back that said something about how some browsers (i.e. IE) have difficulty with some of the more advanced XHTML, and developers have ended up using a sort of bastardized HTML 4/XHTML hybrid.

If you look at many commercial sites, including Apple, they are still HTML 4. I don't think we're quite ready yet to switch over to XHTML, although admittedly, I haven't researched this extensively. I'm probably most reticent to learn something new because I've become so good at using embedded tables.
IE has bugs. It has html bugs, it has xhtml bugs, it has css bugs.

That said, it doesn't mean that a developer cannot use xhtml. I use xhtml almost exclusively, and I can make it work with IE.

Honestly, there's not a whole lot of difference between the two, but the xhtml doctype, IMVHO, makes IE behave less terribly.
     
selowitch
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 06:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by registered_user
I use skEdit and Text Wrangler personally.IE has bugs. It has html bugs, it has xhtml bugs, it has css bugs. That said, it doesn't mean that a developer cannot use xhtml. I use xhtml almost exclusively, and I can make it work with IE. Honestly, there's not a whole lot of difference between the two, but the xhtml doctype, IMVHO, makes IE behave less terribly.
Agreed. Of course, there's not much sense in adhering to the strictures of valid XHTML unless you are also willing to insert the DOCTYPE declaration, is there?
     
registered_user
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Are Eye
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 06:52 PM
 
You have it exactly backwards! the XHTML doctype is what alters the browser's behavior, not the mark up.

You can slap the xhtml strict doctype on html table soup if you want to. Because you have the xhtml strict doctype, IE will render the page in strict mode and behave more predictably. Valid xhtml and w3 validation isn't really necessary because the document is served as text. I know for a fact that a great many pages are written in xhtml but don't validate because there's a link with an ampersand on the page.

Validation is cute, validation is a good practice, but put simply, validation is a geek's endeavor and there are currently very little if any real world problems with publishing pages with the wrong doctype. (Don't get me wrong, my pages validate, I'm just saying)

But if you want to serve your pages as xml, then things change.
     
selowitch
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 07:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by registered_user
You have it exactly backwards! the XHTML doctype is what alters the browser's behavior, not the mark up.
When exactly did I say that "the markup alters the browser's behavior"?
Originally Posted by registered_user
Because you have the xhtml strict doctype, IE will render the page in strict mode and behave more predictably.
Hmmmm. That sounds suspiciously like the DOCTYPE declaration affecting how the browser behaves. I could be wrong, but perhaps you're contradicting yourself.
     
as2
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Northants, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 07:05 PM
 
Thanks for the info above everyone, and the tools that you use.

I've just completely re-written my site using sKEdit and CSSEdit so that it uses the div tag instead of tables.

Anyone see any problems with it let me know.

http://testsite.computherapy.co.uk
[img=http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/1300/desktj.jpg]
     
registered_user
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Are Eye
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 07:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by selowitch
When exactly did I say that "the markup alters the browser's behavior"?Hmmmm. That sounds suspiciously like the DOCTYPE declaration affecting how the browser behaves. I could be wrong, but perhaps you're contradicting yourself.
If you're interested in arguing about something, then go ahead and say what it is and not beat around the bush.
     
selowitch
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 08:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by registered_user
If you're interested in arguing about something, then go ahead and say what it is and not beat around the bush.
I don't understand what you mean; as far as I can tell, my comments were very direct. There was no "beating around the bush." And by trying to change the subject to this irrelevancy, it seems to me that in fact it is *you* who are beating around the bush.

Come to think of it, do you even know what "beating around the bush" means? For your information, it means prevaricating, dancing around a subject. I haven't done that.
     
registered_user
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Are Eye
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 08:22 PM
 
Maybe you need to take a break from the internet for a while.
     
selowitch
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 08:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by registered_user
Maybe you need to take a break from the internet for a while.
That's awfully damned patronizing. Look, pal, if you don't want to respond to my substantive comments, fine — don't. But please refrain from making inane and unprovoked personal attacks, okay? Nobody wants to read that garbage.
     
registered_user
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Are Eye
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 08:39 PM
 
I'm sorry you feel that way
     
Simon Mundy
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 09:11 PM
 
...and as you can see, SOME developers use a lot of sugar to develop with...

Computer thez nohhh...
     
selowitch
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 09:17 PM
 
Does anybody know what on earth registered_user is talking about? Help me out here....
     
registered_user
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Are Eye
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 24, 2005, 09:39 PM
 
No amount of explaining will make you understand.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2005, 12:44 AM
 
Originally Posted by registered_user
I use skEdit and Text Wrangler personally.




IE has bugs. It has html bugs, it has xhtml bugs, it has css bugs.

That said, it doesn't mean that a developer cannot use xhtml. I use xhtml almost exclusively, and I can make it work with IE.

Honestly, there's not a whole lot of difference between the two, but the xhtml doctype, IMVHO, makes IE behave less terribly.

I thought that while XHTML would accept HTML tags, it was designed to use XML? What is the point of using XHTML if you are just going to use HTML tags?
     
selowitch
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2005, 02:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c
I thought that while XHTML would accept HTML tags, it was designed to use XML? What is the point of using XHTML if you are just going to use HTML tags?
That's an excellent question. The best answer I can provide is that while XHTML is definitely designed to be XML-compliant HTML (or, if you like, HTML-compliant XML); however, it works well even when you don't care about it as XML because it is a more disciplined approach to code that yields better results in the long run. XHTML deprecates a lot of tags that are no longer needed or which are peculiar to Internet Explorer. I think this is healthy.

To me, there is a benefit to requiring that all tags be closed, even ones that are neither opening nor closing. I like having all my tags lowercase (except for the DOCTYPE declaration, which isn't really a "tag" per se anyway) because it's neater and less arbitrary. XHTML also seems to fit well with the design philosophy articulated by Jeffrey Zeldman and others that encourages developers to separate content from presentation to the greatest extent possible, by leaving the presentational elements to Cascading Style Sheets (CSS).

That said, I definitely feel that writing valid code is much more important than whether you choose HTML 4.01 Transitional or XHTML 1.1 Strict or whatever. If you write valid, well-structured code, you will help make the World Wide Web a better place.
     
selowitch
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2005, 02:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by registered_user
No amount of explaining will make you understand.
Try me.
     
skalie
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Clogland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2005, 05:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by as2
Anyone see any problems with it let me know.

http://testsite.computherapy.co.uk
Vertical scroll when viewed with 1024 X 728 res.

A minor quibble indeed, but something I'd personally try and eliminate myself (since I develop websites primarily using that res). Could cut down the size of the blue keyboard or something.
     
as2
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Northants, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2005, 06:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by skalie
Vertical scroll when viewed with 1024 X 728 res.

A minor quibble indeed, but something I'd personally try and eliminate myself (since I develop websites primarily using that res). Could cut down the size of the blue keyboard or something.
thanks.. i'll see if I can change it.
[img=http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/1300/desktj.jpg]
     
Phil Sherry
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2005, 07:09 AM
 
Hey, registered_user, selowitch. Guys, seriously. Get a room. Or at least bicker via PM so we don't have to sit through your kindergarten squabbling.
     
registered_user
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Are Eye
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2005, 08:10 AM
 
Originally Posted by Phil Sherry
Hey, registered_user, selowitch. Guys, seriously. Get a room. Or at least bicker via PM so we don't have to sit through your kindergarten squabbling.
Don't bicker about bickering. No one wants to read that either. Just ignore it, it's a better practice.
     
registered_user
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Are Eye
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2005, 08:13 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c
I thought that while XHTML would accept HTML tags, it was designed to use XML? What is the point of using XHTML if you are just going to use HTML tags?
Using the XHTML Strict DOCTYPE causes Internet Explorer to go into "strict mode" and behave better and render the page more accurately. That's what the point is.

It does indeed defy the point of using XHTML, but the point of using XHTML is moot because the server sends it as text and not as xml.
     
CaptainHaddock
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Nagoya, Japan • 日本 名古屋市
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2005, 08:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c
I thought that while XHTML would accept HTML tags, it was designed to use XML? What is the point of using XHTML if you are just going to use HTML tags?
Here's one way to think of it.

HTML (versions 1 through 4) is a basic mark-up language. It was originally supposed to let the browser choose how to render elements, but ended up mixing all kinds of presentation tags anyway, like <font> and <blink>, as well as tag attributes like bgcolor and so on.

XHTML gets back to separating page structure from visual style. XHTML is a subset of XML, but it's usually restricted to a set of tags that correspond to the old HTML tags. The doctype defines exactly which tags are allowed and how they can be nested. So XHTML ends up looking a whole lot like HTML, and it can fool an older browser into thinking it's HTML, but it's really a whole new animal. It's more strict and more flexible, and all formatting should go into the style sheet (CSS) file.
     
registered_user
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Are Eye
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2005, 08:26 AM
 
Originally Posted by selowitch
XHTML deprecates a lot of tags that are no longer needed or which are peculiar to Internet Explorer. I think this is healthy.
No. deprecation is based upon semantic meaning, not "need" and not what is peculiar in IE.


Originally Posted by selowitch
That said, I definitely feel that writing valid code is much more important than whether you choose HTML 4.01 Transitional or XHTML 1.1 Strict or whatever. If you write valid, well-structured code, you will help make the World Wide Web a better place.

How does valid, well structured code whether it be written in HTML or XHTML make the WWW a better place?
     
albook
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Oslo, Norway
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 25, 2005, 12:00 PM
 
SubEthaEdit
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:03 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,