NOTE: Go to Help, About... in your Publisher 2002 and check the version number. If it does not indicate Service Pack 1 (SP 1) or greater then visit http://office.microsoft.com at once and visit the Office Updates to update your Publisher to the most current level. Service Pack 1 contains a vital fix to the HTML coding engine. Do not use Publisher 2002 for a web publication unless it is at version update level SP 1 or higher.

Web page building in Publisher 2002 is very different functionally from that of Publisher 2000. If you come from Publisher 2000 you'll think you know how the program (2002) works but you won't. You'll then likely feel frustrated and feel that Publisher 2002 was made to be harder to use. What happened was that Publisher for the new XP suite was made to look and feel, and function, like the other Office XP Suite products. Shared components, VBA support, same functionality, etc. So the intent was to make everything work the same, it wasn't to make Publisher hard to use. With this change came an entirely new HTML coding engine. Meaning the HTML code that is generated by version 2002 (and subsequent releases) is entirely different from the HTML code that gets generated by version 2000 (and prior).

Once you start designing your 2002 web page document you'll notice some interface changes; buttons, outlines, etc., the sorts of things you'd expect with a version change. This article focuses on functional changes. One of the first changes you will discover in 2002 is that the Web Properties dialog is gone. A similar dialog is now located under the Tools menu, Options, Web Option button. Same place you'll find it in Microsoft Word 2002. One change that is very important to be aware of and effects more than just web page building, is that the WordArt is now the Office Suite's version of WordArt and as such compatibility issues arise with WordArt created in Publisher 2000 WordArt. Once you've created your web pages and are ready to save them and have Publisher write the html files you'll be faced with some of the most significant changes from that of version 2000.

One of these is the naming convention, 2002 does it differently than 2000. 2000 defaulted the home page file to index.html (as needed by your web host) and numbered pages after that, but did allow you to rename the page file names thru the web properties menu if you so desired. 2002 does not default to index.html, the file name will just default to something in the save as box, it is up to you to change it to index.html (or index.htm). Also 2002 has no custom file naming feature as 2000 did. You are stuck with the html file names that Publisher 2002 creates. On a side note, 2000 defaulted to the .html file extension, 2002 defaults to the .htm extension. Either extension is accepted by the web host and they work the same. You can use whichever you prefer, just be sure to be consistent with one of them. (FYI, naming convention changes again in version 2003) (FYI, custom file naming returns in version 2003)

The additional site pages are numbered, slightly similar to 2000's technique, but 2002 does not have the option to change those file names as 2000 did. In 2000 that was an available option in Web Properties. The next big change is that 2002 defaults to putting your site's supporting files into a sub-folder which will carry the same name as what you just saved too, so if you saved to "index.htm" the folder would be named "index_files". Whereas 2000 placed all site files together into one folder, typically the "Publish" folder unless you had modified that. (FYI, version 2003 returns to defaulting to index.htm) (Note: see my article on including external files in a Publisher 2002 (and greater) web)

That folder and it's contents that 2002 creates needs to be uploaded to the web server along with the home page file that is outside of that folder for the site to work, because the links have all been written by 2002 to include that sub-folder in it's path. If you prefer to have all files together with no folder (like 2000 did) you can toggle that on and off. Go to Tools menu, Options, Web Options button, Files tab, and uncheck the top most box and click ok, ok. To keep your site simple I recommend you do not use the sub-folder.

To save the web publication as a web site (generate the html files) you go to File, Export as. This is another change from prior versions as the menu option stated "Save as web" previously. Before the generation of the html files, Publisher will prompt a small dialog indicating that it is using Filtered HTML for the output. This is by design and is part of the new HTML coding engine previously mentioned. If you do not see this prompt then review my "Note" at the top of this article. OK the prompt and continue.

One annoying thing with a 2002 web publication is that the web page doesn't end with the last object on the page as it does in 2000's HTML. Instead it will carry the background for the full length of the page length specified in Page Setup. This is because version 2002 codes a height tag explicitly to the publications page length. Version 2000 did not code a height tag. (FYI, version 2003 returns variable page length specific to page content)

As a Publisher 2000 user you may have seen your pub file being rather large in file size. The good news is that 2002 has compression. You'll typically see a reduction in file size of up to 80% between the two versions. This is only in reference to the .pub file. The .pub file has no relation to the html files generated for a web site from a web publication .pub file.

The HTML generated by the new html coding engine is significantly more abundant then it's younger sibling. It also has a lower probability of achieving cross browser support. The new HTML is designed to exploit the technologies of the Internet Explorer web browser. This new, more abundant code, results in a larger file size. Meaning the full size of a web site created by 2002 will be greatly larger then a web site created by 2000. You will need to confirm that your web host provides adequate space for the web site. Keep in mind that the larger file size means the pages take longer to load and view in the browser. This amount of time and it's degree of visible delay will obviously depend on the quality and the speed of the internet service in use with the browser.

(FYI, there are no plans to modify or replace the HTML coding engine nor to reduce html file sizes, for the foreseeable future)