The Good Old Way
Pete Cooper
Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way to
make pages? I use Notepad in Windows 97 and it does me fine. Frontpage and
HoTMetaL etc just confuse matters, they dont support everything and you end
up having to throw new tags in anyway. WYSIWYG editors arent much better
(MS Publisher 97 for example), they might look good in one browser but
another browser can completely lose it when viewing.
Isnt using NotePad, an art package and maybe a Java or ActiveX Creation
tool much easier? :)
Cheers,
Pete
Stephen Traub
"Pete Cooper" <pe...@trenham.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way to
>make pages? I use Notepad in Windows 97 and it does me fine.
Neat trick, considering Windows _97_ doesn't exist (at least as an
officially released product under that name) ;)!
Steve
--
Web Page Re<p>air - Widen your Web site's audience.
http://www.shore.net/~straub/wpr.htm
Property Valuation Advisors - Commercial Real Estate
Appraisal in New England http://www.shore.net/~straub/
Leonard Grossman
In article <5jvjel$a...@fridge-nf0.shore.net>,
Stephen Traub <str...@shore.net> wrote:
>
>"Pete Cooper" <pe...@trenham.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the
best way to
>>make pages? I use Notepad in Windows 97 and it does me fine.
>
>
>Neat trick, considering Windows _97_ doesn't exist (at least as an
>officially released product under that name) ;)!
>
>
>
>Steve
Maybe he is using a virtual release to create virtual pages ;-)
Len
(BTW: For te besdt of both worlds I recommend Dida -- Notepad on
steroids. Available at www.mcs.net/~grossman/
Leonard Grossman gros...@mcs.net
Notes from a ModemJunkie <URL:http://www.mcs.net/~grossman/>
Genesis in Glass <URL:http://www.mcs.net/~grossman/gropper.htm>
John Gann
Leonard Grossman wrote:
> In article <5jvjel$a...@fridge-nf0.shore.net>,
> Stephen Traub <str...@shore.net> wrote:
> >"Pete Cooper" <pe...@trenham.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >>Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the
> best way to
> >>make pages? I use Notepad in Windows 97 and it does me fine.
> >Neat trick, considering Windows _97_ doesn't exist (at least as an
> >officially released product under that name) ;)!
> Maybe he is using a virtual release to create virtual pages ;-)
Is this some of the highly touted "vaporware"?
> (BTW: For the best of both worlds I recommend Dida -- Notepad on
> steroids. Available at www.mcs.net/~grossman/
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=BB=BB John Gann - Just my 2=A2 worth. =AB=AB =
=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Kenneth Vogt
Pete Cooper wrote:
>
> Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way to
> HoTMetaL etc just confuse matters, they dont support everything and you end
> up having to throw new tags in anyway. WYSIWYG editors arent much better
> (MS Publisher 97 for example), they might look good in one browser but
> another browser can completely lose it when viewing.
>
> Isnt using NotePad, an art package and maybe a Java or ActiveX Creation
> tool much easier? :)
>
> Cheers,
> Pete
A good editor (I like Homesite personally) provides structure that only
the truly disciplined will include using a generic editor like Notepad.
Enough pontification on ugly and beautiful code has taken place on this
forum, so I won't add to it. But I like to be able to read my own code
a month later. I would bet that some people can't read their own code
an hour later. They need the structure provided by a good editor.
Further, time saving devices like buttons, hot keys, and menu items for
repetitive tasks start to matter if you do any volume of coding. While
I don't like the way some code generators "shelter" the author from the
code, a good editor _shows_ the author good code. So my final analyis
is: using Notepad etc. is _simpler_ (and maybe cheaper), but it isn't
_easier_.
--
O O O O
O O O O Kenneth Vogt
O O O O
O O O O Ken...@rkymtnhi.com
O O O
Miguel Cruz
Pete Cooper <pe...@trenham.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way to
>make pages?
I usually use one of the WYSIWYG editors to rough up the first page for a
site and get the look basically down. Then I go in by hand and fine-tune the
HTML. After that it's all in a text editor; you're right, it's just easier
that way. And the WYSIWYG programs never let you get everything quite right.
Each one is missing certain controls. Strange how they're all missing
different things, though.
miguel
ufodude
I don't agree at all...
I hate to write HTML in NotePad. (even though I have)
I'm not big on WYSIWYG, but it's really good for someone that doesn't have
a clue. I learned by this method. I later learned more and decided it
sucked! hee hee...
I have FrontPage 97, Corel WebMasterSuite, HomeSite and HTMLPad pro.
I still like HTML Pad pro the best. It's pretty close to Notepad, but has
a few little tricks in it.
--
ufodude
http://badger.ac.brocku.ca/~cl94bh (Tickle Page)
http://badger.ac.brocku.ca/~jc94bv (My Home Page)
Remove: "NO_SPAM_" to reply... I learned this too late
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pete Cooper <pe...@trenham.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<86214470...@trenham.demon.co.uk>...
>
> Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way
to
Jane Williams
On 27 Apr 1997 16:47:41 GMT, m...@diana.law.yale.edu (Miguel Cruz) wrote:
>Pete Cooper <pe...@trenham.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way to
>>make pages?
Might I suggest you take a look at Webedit? It gives you exactly the same
degree of control you have with Notepad, plus useful buttons to save you
typing tags in. The Table Wizard is also a time-saver.
Jane Williams ja...@williams.nildram.co.uk
http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~janewill/
Pete Cooper
>Neat trick, considering Windows _97_ doesn't exist (at least as an
>officially released product under that name) ;)!
haha, funny. Basically I'm using the (although wrong) commonly used
'Win97' to mean Windows 95 OSR 2 with Internet Explorer 4.
Cheers,
Pete
Gamin
On Sun, 27 Apr 1997, Pete Cooper wrote:
>
> Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way to
> HoTMetaL etc just confuse matters, they dont support everything and you end
> up having to throw new tags in anyway. WYSIWYG editors arent much better
> (MS Publisher 97 for example), they might look good in one browser but
> another browser can completely lose it when viewing.
>
> Isnt using NotePad, an art package and maybe a Java or ActiveX Creation
> tool much easier? :)
>
So far, nothing I have seen of the various Web Publishing programs
encouages me to change, either. The number of support calls from
frustrated users of product a, b or c (fill in with just about any
product you care to name) who are not getting what they paid for is quite
astonishing. My favourite recent one was a client in Hiroshima whose
well-known product had inserted over 4,000 empty lines around his various
Java applets, leading the a complete breakdown of all his stuff. Since
the lines did not show when he examined his HTML, he could not figure out
what was going wrong!
And we won't even mention programs that demand that you have special
extensions on your servers that create huge security gaps.....
Here's to BBEdit and Programmers' File Editor, a Web Serf's best
friends....
lethr
I use notepad as well. However, when in UNIX I'll use vi.
>=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
>=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
>=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Ok. Ok! So 3D=3D. We understand!
--
-
It's IMPOSSIBLE to dress ,''(~x x. .
too provocatively. ; ,:~ ~x.x.x.
_.. _: `( ~.~~.~x
,^^',/^^^^\ (xx-x-x. .~ x ~x .
/^ **,|^^**^^^\ /-##-#. \ . .
/^^)' |^,' \^^/ - _ /`\#/ \ \
/^,) |^^) \^ ,~{; / '\ \
._/ ! ._/ ! `\#;;]/ `,\_._
http://www.netins.net/showcase/leather
My email address can easily be figured out using the
info in the URL above, or you can visit the page.
(I wish all SPAM went to postm...@cyberpromo.com )
Bob Fulkerson
There's one very good freeware authoring tool, Anansi, that works like
a notepad. It has a lot of conveniences for inserting tags, plus
customizable buttons for making your own tags. It isn't WYSIWYG,
but you can click to preview your work on a browser. I find it
very good for managing projects that have a lot of pages..it can
even do global changes. The two sites I've done both had 40+ pages,
and I doubt I could have done them and remained sane using Notepad.
Anansi is at http://www.xs4all.nl/~hbosma/anansi/index.html
Regards,
Bob Fulkerson
Northern Wyoming
http://wavecom.net/~fulker/
Jester
Completely agree to Pete Cooper.
I had my first experience with a wysiwyg editor (some older frontpage, I
admit its been a while). I thought cool, now I can make my own
homepages, wrote some stuff on it just as a test, using specified fonts,
marquee, and a background pic. It looked cool! I then took it to my
browser to get the real homepage feeling, Netscape 2. Well it looked
like crap because the functioins werent supported and the pics werent
found. I was disappointed-
Some month later a firend of mine told me whyn ot make a page its free.
I then tried again. This time. I got a nice message from Microsoft
Frontpage telling me that I had to register because my free time was
over.
Anyway I tried lots of editors, Hotmetal and the like. I think theyre
stupid, and making everything more complicated. I mean Im too lazy even
considering to raise my hand to use a mouse to click the ITALIC smybol:
instead I simply write <i>. In my opinion people make things seem
complex to get money. I also wrote a html editor myself once, of course
it was fun but I would never use it.
I write things on Notepad. This way I can always be up to date, can
include Javascript, can cut and paste from sources. And its free.
--
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lakes/7784
Pete Cooper wrote:
>
> Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way to
> make pages? I use Notepad in Windows 97 and it does me fine. Frontpage and
> HoTMetaL etc just confuse matters, they dont support everything and you end
> up having to throw new tags in anyway. WYSIWYG editors arent much better
> (MS Publisher 97 for example), they might look good in one browser but
> another browser can completely lose it when viewing.
>
> Isnt using NotePad, an art package and maybe a Java or ActiveX Creation
> tool much easier? :)
>
> Cheers,
> Pete
mer...@northland.lib.mi.us
>Anyway I tried lots of editors, Hotmetal and the like. I think theyre
>stupid, and making everything more complicated. I mean Im too lazy even
>considering to raise my hand to use a mouse to click the ITALIC smybol:
>instead I simply write <i>. In my opinion people make things seem
>complex to get money. I also wrote a html editor myself once, of course
>it was fun but I would never use it.
>
>I write things on Notepad. This way I can always be up to date, can
>include Javascript, can cut and paste from sources. And its free.
Nick Bradbury, the author of HomeSite felt the same way went he went
into designing his editor. You should give it a look - it's a very
strong product, IMHO.
--
The Virtual Landlords
Serious Web Site Hosting
http://virtual.landlords.com
J.D. Baldwin
In article <86214470...@trenham.demon.co.uk>, Pete Cooper
<pe...@trenham.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best
>way to make pages? I use Notepad in Windows 97 and it does me
>fine.
I use SGML-mode in Emacs and it's fantastic.
What I *want*, though, is combined WYSIWYG/direct-code-editing. Sort
of like "Reveal Codes" works in WordPerfect. So far as I know, no
tool out there does anything like this.
Of the WYSIWYG tools I've seen, HoTMetaL Pro was the best, but I'd
still rather use a straight text editor. A webmaster needs to keep
his HTML knowledge current, and using a WYSIWYG editor is a good way
to forget everything you know fairly quickly.
FrontPage is totally unacceptable. Horrible, horrible product. And
here I'd just started admitting privately that MS was starting to
get its act together, then they pull a series of stunts with IIS and
FrontPage that are beyond the pale even for them.
>Isnt using NotePad, an art package and maybe a Java or ActiveX
>Creation tool much easier? :)
For the art packages, unlike the HTML editors, higher-end is better.
Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator and the wonderful Paint Shop Pro are
about all you should ever need. As for Java and ActiveX, I'll bite
my tongue and shut up here . . .
--
From the catapult of J.D. Baldwin |+| "If anyone disagrees with anything I
_,_ Finger bal...@netcom.com |+| say, I am quite prepared not only to
_|70|___:::)=}- for PGP public |+| retract it, but also to deny under
\ / key information. |+| oath that I ever said it." --T. Lehrer
***~~~~-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elke
This seems to be highly controversial.
HoTMetaL, by the way, doesn't confuse matters, it supports EVERYTHING,
the only thing that it doesn't support is invalid code.
Elke
>Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way to
>make pages? I use Notepad in Windows 97 and it does me fine. Frontpage and
>HoTMetaL etc just confuse matters, they dont support everything and you end
>up having to throw new tags in anyway. WYSIWYG editors arent much better
>(MS Publisher 97 for example), they might look good in one browser but
>another browser can completely lose it when viewing.
>Isnt using NotePad, an art package and maybe a Java or ActiveX Creation
>tool much easier? :)
>Cheers,
>Pete
Elke Kirschnick
mailto:elk...@aol.com
http://members.aol.com/elkisch/
Deutsche Homepage: http://members.aol.com/ideenweb/
Stephen Marshall
In article <86214470...@trenham.demon.co.uk>, "Pete Cooper"
<pe...@trenham.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way to
> make pages?
On the Mac the text editor BBEdit has the right mix of plain text editing
and helpful extensions ( including a Tables one I wrote myself 8-) which
can help generate the outline of the page quickly and then let me
concentrate on the content. About the only advantage I've seen with visual
editors is something like Fusion when I've got a _lot_ of similar pages to
generate and even there text works fine.
I think this is probably because I'm focussing on content rather than
appearance for most of the web pages I produce here at work (documentation
mostly although check out <http://www.netlink.co.nz/~monpa/> if you like
cats).
The risk I think with visual editors is that they encourage people to
produce pages which they think will be more accessable than they turn out
to be in reality, and they don't encourage budding authors to be critical
about their HTML.
Cheers,
Stephen
--
Dr. S J Marshall, Macintosh Consultant
Victoria University of Wellington, PO Box 600, Wellington, New Zealand
Email Address: Stephen....@vuw.ac.nz
"Indeed, it would not be an exaggeration to describe the history of the computer industry for the past decade as a massive attempt to keep up with Apple." Byte 12/94
Paul Havemann
Kenneth Vogt (Ken...@rkymtnhi.com) writes:
: Pete Cooper wrote:
:>
:> Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way to
:> HoTMetaL etc just confuse matters, they dont support everything and you end
:> up having to throw new tags in anyway. WYSIWYG editors arent much better
:> (MS Publisher 97 for example), they might look good in one browser but
:> another browser can completely lose it when viewing.
:>
:> Isnt using NotePad, an art package and maybe a Java or ActiveX Creation
:> tool much easier? :)
I think you're lumping programs for HTML 'creation' (ugh) together with
honest to goodness HTML editors. That's not fair to real editors. And
the lines are blurred quickly enough; there's HTML Notepad, for example.
: A good editor (I like Homesite personally) provides structure that only
: the truly disciplined will include using a generic editor like Notepad.
: Enough pontification on ugly and beautiful code has taken place on this
: forum, so I won't add to it. But I like to be able to read my own code
: a month later. I would bet that some people can't read their own code
: an hour later. They need the structure provided by a good editor.
: Further, time saving devices like buttons, hot keys, and menu items for
: repetitive tasks start to matter if you do any volume of coding. While
: I don't like the way some code generators "shelter" the author from the
: code, a good editor _shows_ the author good code. So my final analyis
: is: using Notepad etc. is _simpler_ (and maybe cheaper), but it isn't
: _easier_.
I agree. I use Webber, which doesn't "hide" code; it merely simplifies
the tedious task of inserting tags. I don't _have_ to use it, but life
is _way_ too short to re-type stuff like <IMG SRC="yadda.yadda.yadda"
ALT="yadda" WIDTH="yadda" HEIGHT="yadda"> over... and over... and over.
Most real editors I've seen merely, as Kenneth says, save time with
such repetitive tasks.
If you're using macros, predefined keys, and/or a paste buffer, you're
halfway to using a dedicated HTML editor.
Show me someone writing large amounts of HTML with Notepad or such who
sez they never, never, never use macros, predefined keys, or their
paste buffer, and I'll show you a baldfaced fibber... or someone who
really, really, really likes to type. ;}
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Paul Havemann, VP (pa...@hsh.com)
HSH Associates, Financial Publishers
The Nation's Largest Publisher of Mortgage Information
(201) 838-3330 | 1-800-UPDATES | Fax: (201) 838-8294
Mortgage Update BBS: 201-838-8636 Web Site: http://www.hsh.com/
Xiaowei He
I don't agree. One of best things about a WYSIWYG editor is that you don't
have to learn HTML from A to Z. (Who does?) It's like computing with DOS or
Windows.
Take a look at my site. Bet you can't do yours with NotePad.
****************************************************************************
Xiaowei He "Ignore previous cookies."
x...@earthlink.net -- message from a fortune cookie
http://home.earthlink.net/~xhe/
Paul Havemann <pa...@hshuna.hsh.com> wrote in article
<E9H00...@hshuna.hsh.com>...
Miguel Cruz
Why not? It's just a table, some frames, and some incredibly annoying
JavaScript. If you can't do that with NotePad (more importantly, if you
don't want to and reject the possibility of doing it) then your HTML
horizons are going to be quite limited, I think.
miguel
Roving Reporter
I would have once agreed with you, but nowadays HTML is getting so
complicated that it's hard to remember all the format options. I like
to use an editor without the WYSIWYG such as HTML Assistant Pro (available
in 3.x and 95 versions) which is fast, simple to use, and doesn't get in my
way if I want to do something on my own. It also lets me view files with my
existing browser, which is better, IMHO, than WYSIWYG type editors. I
notice the latter run much slower, even on a Pentium with all the bells and
whistles.
On Sun, 27 Apr 1997, Pete Cooper wrote:
>Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way to
>make pages? I use Notepad in Windows 97 and it does me fine. Frontpage and
>HoTMetaL etc just confuse matters, they dont support everything and you end
>up having to throw new tags in anyway. WYSIWYG editors arent much better
>(MS Publisher 97 for example), they might look good in one browser but
>another browser can completely lose it when viewing.
>
>Isnt using NotePad, an art package and maybe a Java or ActiveX Creation
>tool much easier? :)
>
>Cheers,
>Pete
>
>
>
>
**********************************************************
* Therese Shellabarger - tls...@concentric.net *
* http://www.concentric.net/~tlshell/ Shalom tovarot! *
* XENA: http://www.concentric.net/~tlshell/xena.html *
**********************************************************
* See if I care about your opinion, the life I've led -- *
* each dawn I go forth with sword in hand, to sweep scum *
* from the decks of my battleship. Revenge at last, and *
* it be sweet, too, 'cuz now I get the girl, _not you_. *
**********************************************************
Finger: use tls...@finger.concentric.net
Mike Naylor
"Xiaowei He" <x...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>I don't agree. One of best things about a WYSIWYG editor is that you don't
>have to learn HTML from A to Z. (Who does?) It's like computing with DOS or
>Windows.
>
>http://home.earthlink.net/~xhe/
But there's a problem. Go to Web Techs HTML Validation Service at
<URL: http://www.webtechs.com/html-val-svc/> and enter your own URL in the
form. You'll find that it returns a very long list of errors. (I tried it.)
Now what are you going to do about that? You haven't the slightest clue as
to the meaning of those error messages. Are you going to take the position
that your editor is perfect and Web Techs must be wrong? Or are you going
to decide that if you don't understand the error messages and your page
looks okay on your own screen, then it doesn't matter? As far as I can see,
these are your only options if you are not interested in learning HTML.
-
Mike Naylor - myfirstname...@mail.serve.com
Play 5 X 5 Poker at http://www.serve.com/games/
William G. Schlake
I always find it amusing that people that cling to doing things the
hard way, like using Notepad, frequently seem to make wild assumptions
about those that don't. Why do so many think that everyone that uses a
WYSIWYG editor don't understand the principles of the underlying HTML
code? That's just as ridiculous as saying people that eat in
restaurants don't know how to cook or using hand tools instead of
power tools will somehow result in a better built building.
I got news for you pal. A lot of people that use editors such a FP, do
so mostly for the time saved. Not only do we understand HTML cold,
many of us actually know REAL programming, (C, UNIX, PERL, etc.) which
by comparison is light years ahead of simple markup tags that HTML is.
So, the time saved by using a WYSIWYG editor can be used to write
sometime meaningful that makes pages interactive, while you're still
probably looking for the typos you made with Notepad.
Bill
Mike Naylor
"Xiaowei He" <x...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>I don't agree. One of best things about a WYSIWYG editor is that you don't
>have to learn HTML from A to Z. (Who does?)
I responded:
>But there's a problem. Go to Web Techs HTML Validation Service at
><URL: http://www.webtechs.com/html-val-svc/> and enter your own URL in the
>form. You'll find that it returns a very long list of errors. (I tried it.)
>Now what are you going to do about that?
w...@enteract.com (William G. Schlake) wrote:
>I always find it amusing that people that cling to doing things the
>hard way, like using Notepad, frequently seem to make wild assumptions
>about those that don't. Why do so many think that everyone that uses a
>WYSIWYG editor don't understand the principles of the underlying HTML
>code?
You're not being fair in directing those comments at me. I made no such
assumption about "everyone". I was addressing Xiaowei He, who clearly
stated that he felt that with HTML editors, one didn't need to learn HTML.
>I got news for you pal. A lot of people that use editors such a FP, do
>so mostly for the time saved. Not only do we understand HTML cold,
>many of us actually know REAL programming, (C, UNIX, PERL, etc.) which
>by comparison is light years ahead of simple markup tags that HTML is.
I recall a post about a month ago called, "How to make a fool of yourself
in a Newsgroup". Item number two was:
>2. Continue to play 'I can do you one better' because you're
> really into serious ego stroking and are afraid to let the
> other guy have the last word.
A very wise man named William G. Schlake wrote that. I think you should
listen to him.
Decklin Foster
>I don't agree. One of best things about a WYSIWYG editor is that you don't
>have to learn HTML from A to Z.
Yeah, but you have to learn the program. And as an added benefit, deal with
what is characteristically (though not always) buggy and badly portable HTML.
> (Who does?)
The majoroty of people on this ng.
>It's like computing with DOS or Windows.
Don't follow you there. can you elaborate?
>Take a look at my site. Bet you can't do yours with NotePad.
*Anyone* can do much more with notepad than with whatever software created
whatever pages you mentioned.
>Xiaowei He "Ignore previous cookies."
>x...@earthlink.net -- message from a fortune cookie
Shouldn't that be, message from
an HTTP cookie? :-)
>
>Paul Havemann <pa...@hshuna.hsh.com> wrote in article
><E9H00...@hshuna.hsh.com>...
>> Kenneth Vogt (Ken...@rkymtnhi.com) writes:
>> : Pete Cooper wrote:
>> :>
>> :> Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way to
>> :> make pages? I use Notepad in Windows 97 and it does me fine. Frontpage and
>> :> HoTMetaL etc just confuse matters, they dont support everything and you end
>> :> up having to throw new tags in anyway. WYSIWYG editors arent much better
Yes, I completely agree. A palin-text editor, or a text editor with some
features like adding common tags with commands, jumping to spots with bad
html, etc.
>> :> (MS Publisher 97 for example), they might look good in one browser but
>> :> another browser can completely lose it when viewing.
Someone in my computer science class proudly posted a quote-unquote HTML
document they had created on the wall, with the source. for a 2-page (printed
pages) document, FP generated 10 pages of HTML.
>> :> Isnt using NotePad, an art package and maybe a Java or ActiveX
>Creation
>> :> tool much easier? :)
Well, as for Java/ACID, to each his own. but, yes, I agree.
>> I think you're lumping programs for HTML 'creation' (ugh) together with
>> honest to goodness HTML editors. That's not fair to real editors. And
>> the lines are blurred quickly enough; there's HTML Notepad, for example.
Whatever. While i prefer my own methods, yeah, I don't mind any 'creation'
tool as long as it's html validates and is style/logically correct (beyond
validation). The same to hand-authors.
>> : A good editor (I like Homesite personally) provides structure that only
>> : the truly disciplined will include using a generic editor like Notepad.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Que? what's so hard about nicely structured HTML? It's not like brain surgery.
>> : Enough pontification on ugly and beautiful code has taken place on this
>> : forum, so I won't add to it. But I like to be able to read my own code
>> : a month later. I would bet that some people can't read their own code
>> : an hour later. They need the structure provided by a good editor.
I don't feel it's anyones place to step in and tell then to change their ways
because it "for your own good."
>> : Further, time saving devices like buttons, hot keys, and menu items for
>> : repetitive tasks start to matter if you do any volume of coding. While
>> : I don't like the way some code generators "shelter" the author from the
>> : code, a good editor _shows_ the author good code. So my final analyis
>> : is: using Notepad etc. is _simpler_ (and maybe cheaper), but it isn't
>> : _easier_.
Nah. IMHO, anything too complicated to type yourself is not worth the browser
issues it will probably cause. and, IMHO, if you can't put in the effort to
type you really aren't dedicated to your web project.
>> I agree. I use Webber, which doesn't "hide" code; it merely simplifies
>> the tedious task of inserting tags. I don't _have_ to use it, but life
>> is _way_ too short to re-type stuff like <IMG SRC="yadda.yadda.yadda"
>> ALT="yadda" WIDTH="yadda" HEIGHT="yadda"> over... and over... and over.
>> Most real editors I've seen merely, as Kenneth says, save time with
>> such repetitive tasks.
Cut, copy, paste. boing.
>> If you're using macros, predefined keys, and/or a paste buffer, you're
>> halfway to using a dedicated HTML editor.
Well, you nicely anticipated that :) but why the editor when this is what I
need?
>> Show me someone writing large amounts of HTML with Notepad or such who
>> sez they never, never, never use macros, predefined keys, or their
>> paste buffer, and I'll show you a baldfaced fibber... or someone who
>> really, really, really likes to type. ;}
I use nextpad, and the paste buffer. that's all. My sites used to have
fancy-schmancy tables and backgrounds and all that so it is capable there, i
just have them simple by choice now.
But... I might try Webber, just to know what i'm avoiding. post a URL.
--
qrpxyva sbfgre <zbb...@agcyk.arg> - uggc://fuevxr.ubzr.zy.bet/
tbbq tbireazrag. tbbq tbireazrag. fvg. fgnl.
William G. Schlake
You missed my point. Unless I address the poster by name, (which I'll
almost always do by email) Hey, RAM was an exception, I'm making my
comments to the Thread in general and no one in particular.
Obviously, this Thread and dozens like it before take the same tone.
If you use Notepad you'll always make great pages. If you use a
WYSIWYG editor you can't because you don't understand HTML.That's a
crock and what I was commenting on, because that's a long way from the
truth.
If you've read my posts before, you should be use to my rather lively
commentary. As far as my ego, take a look at my picture and you'll
see I don't take myself very seriously. I'm the one in the red shirt,
and like Coke...the kind you put in a glass. The other guy (who can
tell with all that hair that gorilla could be a lady) likes bananas.
Bill
Xiaowei He
It's not that I am against HTML, it's that I feel that I don't have to
learn all the HTML tags to write a Web Page. Years ago, people (including
some friends) told me that I could not compute without learning DOS. Fact
is I have been doing very sophisticated computing tasks without DOS. Not
long ago, people told me I had to learn HTML to build a Web site. And I
built one (a good one, I think) without learning HTML seriously.
BTW, I want to recommend a Web article "Natural Born Killers: Java
Authoring Tools Could Make HTML Obsolete":
http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/story/story_882.html , in case people are
interested.
****************************************************************************
Xiaowei He "Ignore previous cookies."
x...@earthlink.net -- message from a fortune cookie
http://home.earthlink.net/~xhe/
Miguel Cruz <m...@diana.law.yale.edu> wrote in article
<5k9cfc$3...@news.ycc.yale.edu>...
>
> Xiaowei He <x...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >Take a look at my site. Bet you can't do yours with NotePad.
Camaro
JUST WHAT I NEEDED A SITE THAT REMINDS THE PIECE OF SHIT MICROSOFT IS!CHECK
MINE OUT ASSHOLES
--
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/9841/
Dave
William G. Schlake <w...@enteract.com> wrote in article
<336be52...@news.enteract.com>...
>
> I always find it amusing that people that cling to doing things the
> hard way, like using Notepad, frequently seem to make wild assumptions
> about those that don't. Why do so many think that everyone that uses a
> WYSIWYG editor don't understand the principles of the underlying HTML
> code? That's just as ridiculous as saying people that eat in
> restaurants don't know how to cook or using hand tools instead of
> power tools will somehow result in a better built building.
>
> I got news for you pal. A lot of people that use editors such a FP, do
> so mostly for the time saved. Not only do we understand HTML cold,
> many of us actually know REAL programming, (C, UNIX, PERL, etc.) which
> by comparison is light years ahead of simple markup tags that HTML is.
> So, the time saved by using a WYSIWYG editor can be used to write
> sometime meaningful that makes pages interactive, while you're still
> probably looking for the typos you made with Notepad.
>
> Bill
>
Agreed. I happen to use FP after playing around with notepad and Hot Dog.
However, I'm also learning HTML in the process. Every time I insert
something new with one of the brainless buttons, I then view the HTML to
make sure I understand what's going on. I also do all my editing in HTML.
I think its important to understand HTML if you're designing, but I can't
see typing in every single command if you have a good understanding of
what's going on behind the scenes. 8^)
Dave
pan...@acadia.net
I will use Hotdog pro to start, because it is fast, but I do most work
with a program called Textpad, www.textpad.com
It is fast, you can record macros and do multi-file replacements
and is not limitited (in 32 bit) to small file sizes. I can save
without carraige returns, and a whole lot more.
New Era Systems
On Wed, 30 Apr 1997 21:36:04 GMT, pa...@hshuna.hsh.com (Paul Havemann)
wrote:
>Show me someone writing large amounts of HTML with Notepad or such who
>sez they never, never, never use macros, predefined keys, or their
>paste buffer, and I'll show you a baldfaced fibber... or someone who
>really, really, really likes to type. ;}
I happen to know someone who loves to type, and does write
_every_ character of code for his HTML pages using - NOTEPAD!
Personally, I use WebPen, which gives me great control over the code,
and allows me to type when I want to, and use the macros when I want
to. Piece of cake.
Scott
Jim Tom Polk
"Pete Cooper" <pe...@trenham.demon.co.uk> writes:
> Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way to
> make pages? I use Notepad in Windows 97 and it does me fine. Frontpage and
> HoTMetaL etc just confuse matters, they dont support everything and you end
> up having to throw new tags in anyway. WYSIWYG editors arent much better
> (MS Publisher 97 for example), they might look good in one browser but
> another browser can completely lose it when viewing.
A straight text editor? No. I think using a text editor in a HTML mode
is the best way (currently) to make a web page. I would really like
a WYSIWYG HTML editor that would produce valid HTML according to a
specified DTD (or a customized one). The main problem with current
versions that I have seen is that they are trying to put HTML into
a Word Processor format. Won't work. If we wanted that we would
simply put RTF, WordPerfect, Word, etc, etc, documents on the web,
download and read them. Hmm, perhaps a UA that could identify your
perferrred document type and then download the ten or fifteen versions
in different formats on the server, and then run the application
locally.
Yeah, sure (grin).
However, WYSIWYG HTML editors will eventually make it into the mainstream.
I have found ONE that does a great job. It is a wonderful editor and
does not fry HTML. Unfortunately, it is written for OS/2 (grin).
HomePage Publisher (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/clerin/)
dosen't do me much good since I do most of my work in Unix. (shrug)
yah emacs!
--
Jim Tom Polk -:- jtp...@camalott.com -:- http://camalott.com/~jtpolk/
''You might as well fall flat on your face as
lean over too far backwards.'' --James Thurber--
"The Universe is run by the complex interweaving of three
elements: energy, matter and enlightened self-interest."
- G'Kar "Survivors"
Jukka Korpela
"Xiaowei He" <x...@earthlink.net> writes:
> It's not that I am against HTML, it's that I feel that I don't have to
> learn all the HTML tags to write a Web Page. - -
So you are not against structured hypertext markup, but you just don´t
want to learn how it is written?
> Years ago, people (including
> some friends) told me that I could not compute without learning DOS.
If the only computer systems which you were able to use were DOS systems,
that statement was actually true at that time. What is the significance
of this in HTML authoring contexts? Well, one might say that if the only
option available to you is, for some odd reason, to use a particular
program Z for HTML authoring, then you cannot do HTML authoring without
learning to use Z and whatever else is needed for that Z (such as
basic things about Windows if Z is a program which runs on Windows,
basic things about Unix if Z = vi, etc). But this is pretty theoretical,
since most people have a lot of different options here.
> Not long ago, people told me I had to learn HTML to build a Web site. And I
> built one (a good one, I think) without learning HTML seriously.
Writing Web pages, which are HTML pages by definition (with some definition
of HTML), without even trying to learn HTML seriously doesn't sound like
a good idea. (It _might_ be a good idea if there was a _more_ structured
language than HTML which you knew and for which there was a reliable
converter to HTML.) Needlessly, I tried to take a look at your page but
saw just some blinkenlights. Having other things to do, I didn´t want to
wait for images to load and to figure out by myself what _you_ should
make clear at the beginning of your page: what is the page for?
(cf. http://www.hut.fi/~jkorpela/coolhome.html)
Yucca
Lars Eighner
In our last episode <m37mhfz...@localhost.localdomain>,
the lovely and talented Jim Tom Polk <jtp...@localhost.localdomain>
broadcast on comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html,alt.html:
|"Pete Cooper" <pe...@trenham.demon.co.uk> writes:
|However, WYSIWYG HTML editors will eventually make it into the mainstream.
If it is WYSIWYG it can't be HTML. If it is HTML it can't be
WYSIWYG.
Even if you are shilling for one particular proprietary browser,
you can't write WYSIWYG HTML because you cannot know what video
card the machine running the browser has, what video mode it is
in, how big the monitor is, whether the user had change the brightness,
color balance, and contrast, etc., etc.
--
==Lars Eighner=== http://www.io.com/~eighner == eig...@crl.com ==
==(210)979-7124== http://www.crl.com/~eighner == eig...@io.com ==
== 12550 Vista View #302 San Antonio TX 78231-2445 ==
David Mullaney
Jim Tom Polk wrote:
>
> "Pete Cooper" <pe...@trenham.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
> > Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way to
> > make pages? I use Notepad in Windows 97 and it does me fine. Frontpage and
>
> dosen't do me much good since I do most of my work in Unix. (shrug)
>
> yah emacs!
>
I'm with you, Pete; although, I have to side with Jim's preference for
emacs over a generic word processor.
I find that by using emacs (or even vi), I can repeat simple editing
tasks over and over in an html document. My former manager looks at
me kind of funny, but what does he expect? I'm an engineer. :-)
-David
DISCLAIMER: I speak for myself, not for my employer.
Gamin
On Sun, 4 May 1997, New Era Systems wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 1997 21:36:04 GMT, pa...@hshuna.hsh.com (Paul Havemann)
wrote:
>Show me someone writing large amounts of HTML with Notepad or such who
>sez they never, never, never use macros, predefined keys, or their
>paste buffer, and I'll show you a baldfaced fibber... or someone who
>really, really, really likes to type. ;}
Oh, dear. I guess using cut and paste saves me from being bald of face,
but, I really do find a text editor faster than most of the wysiwyg
programs, at least, the ones I have tried so far. At least when i create
a new page in PFE, I do not then have to clean it up in another program
before it will work.....
Not that I am crazy about the keyboard -- too hard on the fingernails,
especially when newly polished -- but, after cleaning up some of the
messes that our clients have uploaded from this program or that, I will
stick with PFE, thanks. (And, if anyone can tell me why Claris chose to
insert over 4,000 lines of empty space in one client's pages around his
Java applets, I am still curious....)
Mike Weatherford
"Pete Cooper" <pe...@trenham.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Does anyone here agree with me that using a text editor is the best way to
>make pages? I use Notepad in Windows 97 and it does me fine. Frontpage and
>HoTMetaL etc just confuse matters, they dont support everything and you end
>up having to throw new tags in anyway. WYSIWYG editors arent much better
>(MS Publisher 97 for example), they might look good in one browser but
>another browser can completely lose it when viewing.
>Isnt using NotePad, an art package and maybe a Java or ActiveX Creation
>tool much easier? :)
>Cheers,
>Pete
I teach HTML classes at work, and as a volunteer in a couple of
groups. I insist that every student learn to code HTML the "good old
way" first, then they can learn to use an editor. There are so many
editors that INTRODUCE problems, that unless you really know and
understand the code, you can end up with a %(*&%#%#_^*^*
mess!
So far, I've taught 62 students, and they agree, learning the code
first saves a lot of time!
I've found a beta HTML editor that lets me open multiple pages at the
same time. It has lots of "bells and whistles" that I don't use, but
as an ASCII text editor, it's great!
Mike Weatherford
Decklin Foster
On Sat, 03 May 1997 01:07:33 GMT, moo...@ntplx.net (Decklin Foster) wrote:
> ( --snip-- )
Well, I just remembered I had a few HTML editors on a free CD i got once, so I
tried them. The *idea* per se is not bad, but i hated all their interfaces. I
guess i'm just set in my ways. Not the HTML ones.
--
i'm a student of the drums, but i'm also a teacher.
http://shrike.home.ml.org/
JDF
The real question is........
How will your WYSIWYG editors fare next year? How about next month?
Dynamic HTML is coming (sadly) and all the notepad users have to do to
download a FAQ - and they're off. Looks like Frontpage and Hot Metal
users might have to shell out for an update....
"Cost 'ya, mate!"
BTW, I do know that there are some good share/freeware HTML editors out
there, I just don't know where to find them.
I use Notepad, but I know f*ck all, my web-pages are riddled with
syntax(?) and my tags are very IE3.0 specific. I think I'll go off to
cry about it somewhere! Damn, I hate this browser war.
"War is hell, oh the humanity!"
Oh, and I use MapThis - instead of doing it manually....
BTW, checking the source of a web-page and finding that it was
"generated" is the equivalent of seeing this,
<html>
<head>
<title>Gosh, isn't this good?</title></head>
<body>
<H1>Welcome to my web-site!</H1>
<P>Hello</P>
<P>Good Bye...</p>
</body>
</html>
"That's his best effort, that is!"
--
James "Don't call me Fluffy" Flacks
"Bother," said Pooh, as someone else stole his taglines.
Degan Outridge
David Mullaney <mull...@fc.hp.com> wrote:
>I find that by using emacs (or even vi), I can repeat simple editing
>tasks over and over in an html document. My former manager looks at
>me kind of funny, but what does he expect? I'm an engineer. :-)
Pardon the detour...<G>...but are there particular drawbacks to using
a WP to edit HTML, or is it just a matter of personal preference?
I do all my work in Word and save as plain text -- I've never noticed
any problems, but if that has limitations or pitfalls, I'll be happy
to change....to another ASCII editor, that is....<G>
Decklin Foster
outr...@primenet.com (Degan Outridge) muttered:
I never use Word because I have to turn off those horrid "smart quotes" and
then tunrn them back on for paper documents. Very annoying.
--
i'm a student of the drums, but i'm also a teacher.
Jason Mayoff
pan...@acadia.net wrote:
>
> On Mon, 28 Apr 1997 21:23:42 GMT, mer...@northland.lib.mi.us wrote:
>
> >>Anyway I tried lots of editors, Hotmetal and the like. I think theyre
> >>stupid, and making everything more complicated. I mean Im too lazy even
> >>considering to raise my hand to use a mouse to click the ITALIC smybol:
> >>instead I simply write <i>. In my opinion people make things seem
> >>complex to get money. I also wrote a html editor myself once, of course
> >>it was fun but I would never use it.
> >>
> >>I write things on Notepad. This way I can always be up to date, can
> >>include Javascript, can cut and paste from sources. And its free.
> >
> >Nick Bradbury, the author of HomeSite felt the same way went he went
> >into designing his editor. You should give it a look - it's a very
> >strong product, IMHO.
> >
> >http://www.dexnet.com
I agree about those huge, time and space consuming programs (although I
did recently download HotDog, just for fun).
Have you tried something called HTMLNotepad. It's as small, compact and
easy as notepad, plus it's got some basic built-in HTML tags and
things. Makes things go a bit faster than with notepad. I've been
using it for years (since I started writing HTML) and I love it.
It's at http://www.cranial.com/software/htmlnote/
BTW: Here's the company's description of the program:
An extension of the basic notepad program supplied with Windows to
include the ability to create Hyper Text Markup
Language for World Wide Web page creation. Written entirely in C this
small executable can be loaded and have finished your
first page before most others have even installed their vbrun300.dll. It
has the functionality to create tables, background
images/colours and lists.
Jason!
Matt Demaree
There is also another text editor that I use:
SuperPad --- Just like notepad but better in one way and bad in
another.
Good - There is not a space restriction, you can have the biggest file
on earth and it would still look at it, unlike notepad which tells you
to use Write.
BAD - does not save the html files as .html not all that bad depending
on what programs you have, like WS-FTP to auto change the extentions
of the files to a different one when uploaded.
All of these files can be downloaded at
http://www.tucows.com/
I have created a WS-FTP help site for those that want to see it at:
http://www.htd.net/help/
Only the ES-FTP one works at the moment, more to come.
- = HyperText Design Network = -
Matt Demaree
Owner
webm...@htd.net
http://www.htd.net/
MayCom
I use HTML pad, just like anyother text editor, except it auto saves your
files as html, has a little file manager on the side so you can easily
refrence your graphics or other pages, and you can customize it with your
own templates and hotkeys.
The only bad part is I can't remember where I found it.
Sorry
--
________________________________________
MAYBERRY COMMUNICATIONS
Web Site Design, Internet Consulting, Training,
Internet Connections, Web Hosting, Custom CGI
solu...@maycom.mb.ca http://www.maycom.mb.ca
Matt Demaree <ma...@htd.net> wrote in article
<338724cf...@news.crosslink.net>...
Daedalus
MayCom <ke...@maycom.mb.ca> wrote in article
<01bc696f$97808580$2eea...@wpg-01.escape.ca>...
> I use HTML pad
> The only bad part is I can't remember where I found it.
> Sorry
jg
Notepad?
try Homesite... www.allaire.com/homesite -- i think
If you ever need to build a site that requires tinkering
on many pages, it allows you to search and replace on whole sections
of code including line breaks. I've used it and it's much better than notepad.
You can save custom code also and print it to the editor field at the click
of a button... yes... much like the Italic button, but you can customize
exactly what is int it.
anyway, it's just better than notepad..give it a shot