Re: HTML editor: does everyone need to be on the same page?
Much has been made about whether or not one can produce "good code" (whatever
that is) with a WYSIWYG HTML editor. Specifically, some in this thread have
questioned the utility of Microsoft FrontPage as far as the "quality" of its
code is concerned. I would like to provide a real world example of how I use
FrontPage 2000 AND a non-WYSIWYG editor to produce code that validates both to
XHTML 1.0 and to WAI standards.
I simply use the option to open a page I want to work in with the editor I want
to use, in this case the free HTML editor available from W3C called "HTML Kit."
The document management aspects of FP 2K still work, and the code I produce, in
our current situation XHTML 1.0 Strict or Transitional, validates. Nor does
FrontPage produce extraneous code. ....
My first encounter with FrontPage was FP97. No way could that be used as Tom does now, and no way can I express my opinion of it in a public forum. I got away from it quickly on productivity grounds, but the scars remain. The output and the behaviour were so bad that for some days I couldn't believe what I was seeing, and I wasted several hours looking for other explanations. I later had a brief encounter with WP2000, which I found to be unremarkable: no particular advantages; some quirks, but no more than most tools. Not my tool of choice, but a certainly a reasonable tool for, say, an intranet where the client platform is standardised on Microsoft products.
Which raises the general issue is that most tools evolve, and the business of most tool producers relies on upgrades. IOW, a standardised development platform is subject to change, and most software companies feel the appeal of differentiating their products by improving on external standards one way or another. Result, sooner or later your standardised development platform turns into <doomful music> L E G A C Y </doomful music>
I don't think this is a problem; it's just a fact of life and the decision about changing standard platforms is just another difficult but normal business decision. But it does suggest that there might be a medium- and long-term commercial advantage to companies that keep some curiosity and expertise about developments outside their standard platform. Anyone in a position to comment? Or is the industry still terminally short-term?
Sandra Charker
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
A landmark hotel, one of America's most beautiful cities, and three and a half days of immersion in the state of the art:
IPCC 01, Oct. 24-27 in Santa Fe. http://ieeepcs.org/2001/
+++ Miramo -- Database/XML publishing automation. See us at +++
+++ Seybold SFO, Sept. 25-27, in the Adobe Partners Pavilion +++
+++ More info: http://www.axialinfo.com http://www.miramo.com +++
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
References:
Re: HTML editor: does everyone need to be on the same page?: From: Kate O'Neill
Re: HTML editor: does everyone need to be on the same page?: From: Tom Murrell
Previous by Author:
Documentation Review Process and Tools
Next by Author:
Re: OT: Archimedes Socrates, ace tech writer, wins another one
Previous by Thread:
Re: HTML editor: does everyone need to be on the same page?
Next by Thread:
RE: HTML editor: does everyone need to be on the same page?
Search our Technical Writing Archives & Magazine
Visit TechWhirl's Other Sites
Sponsored Ads