another semi web site shot to hell?
in [Design]
|
From: Joerg on 29 Sep 2006 19:22 Hello Mark, >> >>>>> ... You can code that in raw >>>>>HTML, especially with a site as lean and clean as yours: >>>>>http://werbach.com/barebones/ >>>>> >>>>>I'd guess that the majority of errors that that checker reports are >>>>>artifacts of letting Microsoft get their claws into your site. ;-) >>>>> >>>> >>>>But writing straight HTML is almost like writing assembler code. I am >>>>currently poring over a stack of assembler pages. No fun for an analog >>>>guy. Filter stuff no less, yech. >>>> >>>>I'd prefer a simple writer. Have to look, I think one came with my >>>>hosting package. The ideal scenario would be if such a writer could also >>>>read web pages (including hyperlink jumps). Word can do that nicely but >>>>none of the others I tried could which is a bummer if you want to try >>>>things out. >>>> >>> >>>FrontPage is pretty easy to use... provided you don't want any fancy >>>functions... which I don't. >>> >> >>Yabbut, it's from MS and they could not even make Word and IE compatible. >> >>Maybe I'll give it a spin anyway. After all, they created Works which is >>a fine and robust SW that I use to maintain all my biz databases, lab >>stock database and so on. > > > Take a look at http://www.nvu.com/ . It's an open source WYSIWYG HTML > editor. This is the follow-on of Mozilla Composer, supposedly better > (i.e. I haven't tried it). Probably fine for a simple web page. People > seem to have mixed reactions about Nvu. > Thanks! I wonder if part of that is what became integrated into Mozilla's SeaMonkey project as a new composer. > I haven't seen any Microsoft HTML editor produce HTML that passes lint > or produces sane HTML. Word puts out really crappy HTML. > That's why I am reluctant to buy another MS product here. My dream would be something I could also use as a Wiki editor. It needs to be able to read and write, meaning it must be capable of jumping to the correct page when you click on its hyperlink. For some reason MS-Word does that nicely while all the others I tried don't. Not even Mozilla Composer can do it. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com
From: jasen on 29 Sep 2006 21:01 On 2006-09-29, Robert Latest <boblatest(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Wrong advice. It is up to the reader to adjust the browser width to his > taste. The page author should make no assumptions about screen width. > > What if Joerg would put in line breaks to make the lines shorter? This > would look shitty on anybody's browser if the reader were to set his > window narrower than his line length. What if someone preferred to read > the page in larger font? Then the lines would become too wide again. about the "best" that can be done would be setting the maximum-width of the body of the page proportionat to the font chosen something like <style type="text/css"> body { max-width:40em;} </style> in the head of the HTML document. but internet explorer (some versions atleast) have trouble with concepts like maximum. Also usually something other than body is a better choice to style. -- Bye. Jasen
From: qrk on 30 Sep 2006 13:40 On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 23:22:44 GMT, Joerg <notthisjoergsch(a)removethispacbell.net> wrote: [snippage] >> Take a look at http://www.nvu.com/ . It's an open source WYSIWYG HTML >> editor. This is the follow-on of Mozilla Composer, supposedly better >> (i.e. I haven't tried it). Probably fine for a simple web page. People >> seem to have mixed reactions about Nvu. >> > >Thanks! I wonder if part of that is what became integrated into >Mozilla's SeaMonkey project as a new composer. The whole Composer project seems to be a difficult beast to follow. Daniel Glazman, the developer of Nvu, appears to be leading the newest developement of Mozilla Composer. The newest versions of Nvu are now Kompozer (http://kompozer.net). Some guy unofficially/underhandedly took over the Nvu code base since Nvu developement has stopped. There are people that use Nvu to edit Wiki pages according to Glazman's blog. --- Mark
From: Homer J Simpson on 30 Sep 2006 15:50 "Rich Grise" <rich(a)example.net> wrote in message news:pan.2006.09.30.12.19.42.688671(a)example.net... > Well, the simplest writer, if course, is notepad. ;-) But then, of > course, the HTML writer (the person) has to know it. I believe that http://www.trs-80.com/ was all done in Notepad - at least it used to say so.
From: Joerg on 30 Sep 2006 16:06
Hello Mark, > >>>Take a look at http://www.nvu.com/ . It's an open source WYSIWYG HTML >>>editor. This is the follow-on of Mozilla Composer, supposedly better >>>(i.e. I haven't tried it). Probably fine for a simple web page. People >>>seem to have mixed reactions about Nvu. >>> >> >>Thanks! I wonder if part of that is what became integrated into >>Mozilla's SeaMonkey project as a new composer. > > > The whole Composer project seems to be a difficult beast to follow. > Daniel Glazman, the developer of Nvu, appears to be leading the newest > developement of Mozilla Composer. The newest versions of Nvu are now > Kompozer (http://kompozer.net). Some guy unofficially/underhandedly > took over the Nvu code base since Nvu developement has stopped. > > There are people that use Nvu to edit Wiki pages according to > Glazman's blog. > That would be good. I never understood why Composer would refuse to jump to a target page from a hyperlink. It should at least do that upon a right click. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com |