WYSIWYG HTML Editors

[prt7u]

Howdy,

I've started back afte a very long time of working with web pages for
an organization that I am affiliated with (personally not
professionally) . Seeing that technology has advanced a lot since the
last time I authored web pages (using vi), I am looking for a good,
"free" WYSIWYG HTML Editor.

Now, before ya go and hit the reply key, I've already tinkered with
"amaya" which was pretty cool and then I moved to "Nvu", which I like
but I wish would handle frames. For some reason it has trouble with
them.

Having said that, the only other thing would be that I would like it to
run on my MacBook.

Thanks in advance,

Pete

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Re: WYSIWYG HTML Editors

prt7u wrote:

but I wish would handle frames. For some reason it has trouble with
them.

Maybe that is a Good Thingâ„¢. <g>

You've probably seen this page before...
<http://www.html-faq.com/htmlframes/?FramesAreEvil>

Sorry, can't help you with a WYSIWYDG. I use a text editor.

--
-bts
-Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck

[Lars Eighner]

Re: WYSIWYG HTML Editors

In our last episode, <eqvadt$2bb$1@m urdoch.acc.Virg inia.EDU>, the lovely and
talented prt7u broadcast on comp.infosystem s.www.authoring.html:

Howdy,

I've started back afte a very long time of working with web pages for
an organization that I am affiliated with (personally not
professionally) . Seeing that technology has advanced a lot since the
last time I authored web pages (using vi), I am looking for a good,
"free" WYSIWYG HTML Editor.

This used to be a frequently asked question. The answer is that there
cannot be any such thing. If you scan the subject headers in this group you
will see many of the sort "Looks good in Firefox, but wrong in IE." What
your documents in a browser depends upon the rendering engine of the
browser, which is why a WYSIWYG editor is impossible: it cannot know what
brower(s) will be used to view the document (and that does not even take
into account things like color which depend not only on the browser, but
also upon the hardware and hardware adjusments. Moreover, the "what you
see" should be adjusted in CSS, not HTML --- and no, there isn't a WYSISWYG
CSS editor either.

Now, before ya go and hit the reply key, I've already tinkered with
"amaya" which was pretty cool and then I moved to "Nvu", which I like
but I wish would handle frames. For some reason it has trouble with
them.

The numerous reasons that frames are a bad idea are also frequent answers to
questions.

Having said that, the only other thing would be that I would like it to
run on my MacBook.

Thanks in advance,

Pete

--
Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/ <http://myspace.com/larseighner>
Countdown: 705 days to go.

[Nikita the Spider]

Re: WYSIWYG HTML Editors

In article <eqvadt$2bb$1@m urdoch.acc.Virg inia.EDU>,
prt7u <prt7u@Virginia .EDUwrote:

Howdy,
>
I've started back afte a very long time of working with web pages for
an organization that I am affiliated with (personally not
professionally) . Seeing that technology has advanced a lot since the
last time I authored web pages (using vi), I am looking for a good,
"free" WYSIWYG HTML Editor.
>
Now, before ya go and hit the reply key, I've already tinkered with
"amaya" which was pretty cool and then I moved to "Nvu", which I like
but I wish would handle frames. For some reason it has trouble with
them.

It's not alone; I have trouble with frames too!

Having said that, the only other thing would be that I would like it to
run on my MacBook.

Not to be a smart-ass, but I think you're more likely to find the Tooth
Fairy than a WYSIWYG HTML editors. WYSIWYG works for print layout but
it's a false promise for HTML.

Good, free non-WYSIWYG editors for the Mac that I've tried:
TextWrangler, jEdit (a little clunkier, but cross platform, make sure
you get the XML plugin to get nice HTML features) and Komodo Edit.

--
Philip

http://NikitaTheSpider.com/

Whole-site HTML validation, link checking and more

[Andreas Borutta]

Re: WYSIWYG HTML Editors

Lars Eighner schrieb:

>I am looking for a good,
>"free" WYSIWYG HTML Editor.

>
This used to be a frequently asked question. The answer is that there
cannot be any such thing.

That's true.
We better talk about the only reasonable type of html-editor for human
authors:
WYSIWY*M*

Or do you like to edit data tables in your texteditor?
Or are you as fast in editing data tables in a texteditor as in a
WYSIWYM editor?
Or do you never edit data tables by hand?

But a data table is only the most obvious markup, for which a
texteditor is a poor tool.
A texteditor annoys an author with letting him view unneccessary
things - in standard situations (=standard markup).
In non-standard situations, of course, a texteditor is a must.

But well. That topic isn't one, which is traditionally discussed
unprejudiced. ;)

Andreas
--

http://borumat.de/firefox-browser-tipps

http://borumat.de/thunderbird-email-tipps

http://borumat.de/openoffice-writer-tipps

http://borumat.de/40tude-dialog-newsreader-tipps

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Re: WYSIWYG HTML Editors

Andreas Borutta wrote:

Or do you like to edit data tables in your texteditor?

Of course not. I edit them in my script. Usually a few lines of code
(PHP in my case) to display an entire data table.

Or are you as fast in editing data tables in a texteditor as in a
WYSIWYM editor?

Can't really answer that one, as I don't use a WYSIWYTYW.

Or do you never edit data tables by hand?

No. The data comes from the database. Why edit it by hand? Write one
recursive loop in a script, and output all the HTML from there.

--
-bts
-Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck

[Lars Eighner]

Re: WYSIWYG HTML Editors

In our last episode, <1dkupky6n0lgd. dlg@borumat.de> , the lovely and talented
Andreas Borutta broadcast on comp.infosystem s.www.authoring.html:

Lars Eighner schrieb:

>>I am looking for a good,
>>"free" WYSIWYG HTML Editor.

>>
>This used to be a frequently asked question. The answer is that there
>cannot be any such thing.

That's true.
We better talk about the only reasonable type of html-editor for human
authors:
WYSIWY*M*

Or do you like to edit data tables in your texteditor?

For the most part, I edit data in a database and php (re)creates the tables
faster than I could in any kind of editor.

Or are you as fast in editing data tables in a texteditor as in a
WYSIWYM editor?

I'm sure I am. Why in the world would one editor be any faster than the
other.

Or do you never edit data tables by hand?

Seldom. But if the html were ever too messy to read, I;d get my editor to
pipe it through tidy.

But a data table is only the most obvious markup, for which a
texteditor is a poor tool.
A texteditor annoys an author with letting him view unneccessary
things - in standard situations (=standard markup).

On the contrary, it makes it clear to the author what, exactly, he is
writing. How do you enter a copyright symbol in a so-called WYSIWYG
editor? Well, you go up to the menu, pull down something, hunt through
a table of characters, etc. In my text editor, it's Meta-aOc. An
eacute? Meta-ae'. It's Meta-a + how you would compose the character
with a typewriter: cent sign Meta-ac/. What could be easier?

In non-standard situations, of course, a texteditor is a must.

But well. That topic isn't one, which is traditionally discussed
unprejudiced. ;)

Andreas

--
Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/ <http://myspace.com/larseighner>
Countdown: 705 days to go.

[Ed Seedhouse]

Re: WYSIWYG HTML Editors

On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 15:14:54 -0500, Nikita the Spider
<NikitaTheSpide r@gmail.comwrot e:

>Not to be a smart-ass, but I think you're more likely to find the Tooth
>Fairy than a WYSIWYG HTML editors. WYSIWYG works for print layout but
>it's a false promise for HTML.

True, simply because there is no single "WYG" on the web. "What you
get" is not one thing but may appear in many different ways which the
web page has no control over. "WYG" is particular to the computer,
monitor, and browser which uses the page, not to mention the viewport
size of the browser being used. So the search for a "wysiwyg" web
editor is a futility. The Web is *not* paper.

[Eric Lindsay]

Re: WYSIWYG HTML Editors

In article
<NikitaTheSpide r-D5219B.15145314 022007@news-server.nc.rr.co m>,
Nikita the Spider <NikitaTheSpide r@gmail.comwrot e:

In article <eqvadt$2bb$1@m urdoch.acc.Virg inia.EDU>,
prt7u <prt7u@Virginia .EDUwrote:
>

I am looking for a good, "free" WYSIWYG HTML Editor.

Now, before ya go and hit the reply key, I've already tinkered with
"amaya" which was pretty cool and then I moved to "Nvu", which I like
but I wish would handle frames. For some reason it has trouble with
them.

>
It's not alone; I have trouble with frames too!

I thought everyone had trouble with frames?

Having said that, the only other thing would be that I would like it to
run on my MacBook.

>
Not to be a smart-ass, but I think you're more likely to find the Tooth
Fairy than a WYSIWYG HTML editors. WYSIWYG works for print layout but
it's a false promise for HTML.
>
Good, free non-WYSIWYG editors for the Mac that I've tried:
TextWrangler, jEdit (a little clunkier, but cross platform, make sure
you get the XML plugin to get nice HTML features) and Komodo Edit.

I like Peter Borg's free and open source Smultron for the Mac.
http://smultron.sourceforge.net/ It has similar features to the
excellent Text Wrangler, but feels much more like a new Mac application.
Projects and a decent multifile search and replace in it help you with
HTML sites with many common sections between pages (instead of using
frames perhaps).

For the CSS, I like StyleMaster http://westciv.com/style_master/ as it
gives you a reasonable idea of what the web page will look like after
styling. It also flags some problems with different browsers, to make
cross browser styling easier.

--

http://www.ericlindsay.com

[Andreas Borutta]

Re: WYSIWYG HTML Editors

Lars Eighner schrieb:

>Or do you like to edit data tables in your texteditor?

>
For the most part, I edit data in a database and php (re)creates the tables
faster than I could in any kind of editor.

Of course that is the appropriate way for huge data tables, which
takes all or some of its contents of a database, which is may be
connected with other databases etc.

But for a quick and non-complex data table inside a usual document
wich consists of a mixture of text, pictures and - here and there - a
data table, IMHO using a database is "to break a butterfly on a
wheel".
And more precisely:
It takes the time of the author. He needs more time as if he does not
have to change his editor.

>Or are you as fast in editing data tables in a texteditor as in a
>WYSIWYM editor?

>
I'm sure I am. Why in the world would one editor be any faster than the
other.

I asked "are you as...".
I meant the "team" of a user and his tool, of course.
Not the tool alone.

>Or do you never edit data tables by hand?

>
Seldom.

I heard that often from people who thinks WYSIWYM is useless.

And it makes sense from that point of view. But to talk about the
whole one has to look deeper into the needs of other usergroups and
other usecases.

But if the html were ever too messy to read, I;d get my editor to
pipe it through tidy.

That does not solve it.
A linearised view of a table in HTML sourcecode could never be as
readable as a graphic view of the same table.
For a human editor.

>But a data table is only the most obvious markup, for which a
>texteditor is a poor tool.
>A texteditor annoys an author with letting him view unneccessary
>things - in standard situations (=standard markup).

>
On the contrary, it makes it clear to the author what, exactly, he is
writing. How do you enter a copyright symbol in a so-called WYSIWYG
editor? Well, you go up to the menu, pull down something, hunt through
a table of characters, etc. In my text editor, it's Meta-aOc. An
eacute? Meta-ae'.

Of course I use the keyboard to enter Characters.
For all frequently used characters I define a little hotstring, which
is BTW a lot easier to type.
Example "---" which gets replaced on the fly by a dash.

I know that many users of WYSIWYM editors are clicking around in
boring menus instead of using efficient keyboard functions.
But that the fault of them and not of the type of the editor.

Andreas
--

http://borumat.de/firefox-browser-tipps

http://borumat.de/thunderbird-email-tipps

http://borumat.de/openoffice-writer-tipps

http://borumat.de/40tude-dialog-newsreader-tipps

[Andreas Borutta]

Re: WYSIWYG HTML Editors

Beauregard T. Shagnasty schrieb:

>Or do you like to edit data tables in your texteditor?

>
Of course not. I edit them in my script.

Not every webauthor is a programmer.

Usually a few lines of code
(PHP in my case) to display an entire data table.

And to enter the data you change to another editor, right?

And to markup parts of the table with THEAD, TBODY, TFOOT you change
the editor?

And to put some class attributes to some data cells you change your
editor?

In a WYSIWYM that is not neccessary.
The author just stays in a perfect readable view for two dimensional
contents.
He just types some hotkeys. No more.
Than the data table is ready. And he continues to enter text and mark
it up as headers and paragraphs.

That's smart in my view. And it's fast.

For complex and dynamic datatables please see my other followup to
Lars.

>Or are you as fast in editing data tables in a texteditor as in a
>WYSIWYM editor?

>
Can't really answer that one, as I don't use a WYSIWYTYW.

Some day there will may be a contest on a public podium, with
different kind of tasks for webauthors of comparable experience.
Than the time will be measured in which the contestants could solve
the tasks.

I'm sure there will be several disciplines in which the authors who
are using a good(tm) WYSIWYM editor will win.

Please don't missunderstand me:
I do not mean that a WYSIWYM view is the best tool for every task for
webauthors. Surely it is not.
A WYSIWYM without a sourceview is completly useless.

I want to advocate for "the fastes method for specific tasks for
webauthor with their specific knowlegde".

Andreas
--

http://borumat.de/firefox-browser-tipps

http://borumat.de/thunderbird-email-tipps

http://borumat.de/openoffice-writer-tipps

http://borumat.de/40tude-dialog-newsreader-tipps

[Adrienne Boswell]

Re: WYSIWYG HTML Editors

Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Andreas Borutta <borumat@gmx.de >
writing in news:1u12ovx554 6hr.dlg@borumat .de:

I want to advocate for "the fastes method for specific tasks for
webauthor with their specific knowlegde".
>
>

The editor I use (HTML-Kit) has type ahead, so it is very fast. I also
reuse a lot of code. For example, this little bit here takes a few
seconds to put together, and all I have to do is change a few values,
and the form creates itself. If I wanted, I could run it locally, copy
source and put it up. This is not something I would want to use
anything but a text editor.

<%
fields = "requestedb y, ministry, payto, amount, address, city, state,
zip, attention, phone, purpose, date required"
fieldsarr = split(fields,", ")

labels = "Requested By, Ministry, Pay To, Amount, Address, City, State,
Zip, Attention, Phone, Purpose, Date Required"
labelsarr = split(labels,", ")

fillinfirst = "Your Name, Your Ministry, Payable To, $, Your Address,
Your City, Your State, Your Zip, Whose Attention, 555-555-1212, Purpose
of Check, MM/DD/YYYY"
fillinarr = split(fillinfir st,", ")
%>

<form method="post" action="<%=Requ est.ServerVaria bles
("SCRIPT_NAME") %>">
<fieldset><lege nd>Check Request</legend>
<% for f = 0 to ubound(fieldsar r) %>
<label for="<%=fieldsa rr(f)%>" id="<%=fieldsar r(f)%>1"><%=lab elsarr
(f)%>: </label<input type="text" name="<%=fields arr(f)%>" id="<%
=fieldsarr(f)%> " value="<%=filli narr(f)%>" onfocus="if(thi s.value == '<%
=fillinarr(f)%> ') this.value = '';" /><br />
<% next %>
<p><input type="submit" value="Submit" /></p>
</fieldset>
</form>

--
Adrienne Boswell at Home
Arbpen Web Site Design Services

http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info

Please respond to the group so others can share

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Re: WYSIWYG HTML Editors

Andreas Borutta wrote:

Beauregard T. Shagnasty schrieb:

>[ Andreas Borutta wrote: ] (please don't snip attributes)

>>Or do you like to edit data tables in your texteditor?

>>
>Of course not. I edit them in my script.

>
Not every webauthor is a programmer.

You asked me if I like to edit data tables in my texteditor. I said "Of
course not." Other web authors may do it differently.

>Usually a few lines of code (PHP in my case) to display an entire
>data table.

>
And to enter the data you change to another editor, right?

No, normally I allow the client to enter the data in the CMS I wrote for
him.

And to markup parts of the table with THEAD, TBODY, TFOOT you change
the editor?

No. That is all done within the few lines of PHP coding.

And to put some class attributes to some data cells you change your
editor?

No. That is all done within the few lines of PHP coding.

In a WYSIWYM that is not neccessary. The author just stays in a
perfect readable view for two dimensional contents. He just types
some hotkeys. No more. Than the data table is ready. And he continues
to enter text and mark it up as headers and paragraphs.

Even if this data really does contain "headers" and "paragraphs ", I'll
still do the markup from my PHP script. It is quite simple.

You have multiple rows in the table in your database? You use a
do...while loop and write code just once. No matter how many rows are in
the table.

That's smart in my view. And it's fast.

Not as fast as .. well, I guess I'm not going to convince you of this,
as you are probably one of those web authors who isn't a programmer.

For complex and dynamic datatables please see my other followup to
Lars.

I did. I'm not convinced.

Some day there will may be a contest on a public podium, ...

Probably already has been ... who knows?

--
-bts
-Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck

[Andreas Borutta]

Re: WYSIWYG HTML Editors

Beauregard T. Shagnasty schrieb:

Andreas Borutta wrote:
>

>Beauregard T. Shagnasty schrieb:

>>[ Andreas Borutta wrote: ] (please don't snip attributes)
>>>Or do you like to edit data tables in your texteditor?
>>>
>>Of course not. I edit them in my script.

>>
>Not every webauthor is a programmer.

>
You asked me if I like to edit data tables in my texteditor. I said "Of
course not." Other web authors may do it differently.

ACK. I just want to my finger on a general assessment of WYSIWYM
editors as useless tools.

I believe that programmers come up with some lines of script code just
like that to produce a data table or a form.
And of course that is extremly fast.

If that method is really appropriate for a non-complex data table, is
a philosophical question, which also touches esthical categories of
styles of working.

For me ist seems to be "oversized" to create a non-complex single tiny
little data table, may be a 5x10, with a script instead of just edit
it in a WYSIWYM editor.

>>Usually a few lines of code (PHP in my case) to display an entire
>>data table.

>>
>And to enter the data you change to another editor, right?

>
No, normally I allow the client to enter the data in the CMS I wrote for
him.

I understand.
My focus was on the author-administrator (singer-songwriter :)

For some websites the author and the website administrator is the same
person.

And I agree fully with you, that a CMS is an excellent method, when
clients should enter data into a page.

>And to markup parts of the table with THEAD, TBODY, TFOOT you change
>the editor?

>
No. That is all done within the few lines of PHP coding.

[...]

OK, I learn that as new for me.
Thanks for explaining your method.

>That's smart in my view. And it's fast.

>
Not as fast as .. well, I guess I'm not going to convince you of this,
as you are probably one of those web authors who isn't a programmer.

Second is true, first not.
You convinced me.

Andreas

[Bergamot]

Re: WYSIWYG HTML Editors

Andreas Borutta wrote:

>
It takes the time of the author. He needs more time as if he does not
have to change his editor.

Why do you need multiple editors in the first place? One good plain text
editor is enough. It needn't specifically be a web authoring tool.

http://www.crimsoneditor.com/

A linearised view of a table in HTML sourcecode could never be as
readable as a graphic view of the same table.

Perhaps, but if it's a small table, as you've been arguing for, then it
shouldn't really matter that much. A row would be coded for readability
to begin with, then it may just be a matter of copy and paste. If you
code by hand, you become accustomed to it.

I know that many users of WYSIWYM editors are clicking around in
boring menus instead of using efficient keyboard functions.

Macros can save anyone a little time. A good text editor will let you
define just about anything you want.

--
Berg