Thank you for your reply. Appreciated.
That’s not entirely true. For starter, what you build in Webflow IS the code. There is no abstraction. A box you create is either a div or another box html5 element.
I guess what I’m thinking is: there is no way to see overrides: spans inside body text, or additional classes etc.
A long time ago I worked in an academic book publishers. We didn’t use Quark or InDesign but another software called Ventura. It was much more like raw code. The editor would mark up the content (like HTML), marking headings, italics, bolds, sub heads etc and then we would flow the content into the layout and establish the styles (like CSS). Webflow reminds me of InDesign: visual. Handcoding reminds me of Ventura: being able to see the underlying code.
I’m not saying Webflow is wrong, but there are times when I’m using InDesign that it would be handy to see the “markup” of the content, to be able to see style overrides and spans.
Is handcoding faster?
When I handcode I use REMs. Then at my breakpoints by changing the base text size, I can make everything smaller or bigger - by simply changing one line of code.
Also, if I want to change the baseline grid of my website, when handcoding I can simply do a find/change and in one go change the line-height of all my elements.
Just these two examples are massive time savers.
Anyway, thanks again for your time and I’ll probably give Webflow a try…