[sclug] Simple WYSIWYG HTML editor?

[Mayuresh Kadu]

Whether one prefers to edit HTML using WYSIWYG or in the RAW is entirely a
matter of personal preference ;-) IMHO, one should simply go through the
tools you come across and use the one that appeals :-)

Mayuresh
-- 
My Blogs:
http://mskadu.blogspot.com | http://mytechieself.blogspot.com |
http://digitalcaptures.blogspot.com

On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Adam Trickett <adam.trickett at iredale.net>
wrote:

> On Monday 03 Mar 2008, John Stumbles wrote:
> > Can anyone suggest a simple WYSIWYG HTML editor?
>
> No, fundamentally I don't believe such a thing exists. They all screw up
> your
> HTML at best, and wreck everything at worst. Personally I think you are
> better off with a source editor, though I agree it's nice to have
> something
> that helps you out, e.g. Quanta+ or Bluefish.
>
> > I'm just thinking surely there's something better?
>
> Your options are:
> * Dreamweaver (pay your money and hope it works on WINE, or dual boot or
> run
> Windows in a VM).
> * Mozilla Composer (not much development I believe)
> * Nvu (Spin off from Composer, though I believe development has died also)
> * Kompozer (Spin off from Nvu)
>
> Source Editors:
> HTML-Kit (Windows software that runs under WINE)
> Quanta+ (KDE)
> Bluefish
>
> Sorry to sound negative, but editing HTML properly is something that
> should be
> done in the RAW, it's the only way to get acceptable and repeatable
> results.
> If you don't want to lean HTML, then don't make web pages. HTML isn't hard
> either, the basics are fairly straight forward.
>
> --
> Adam Trickett
> Overton, HANTS, UK
>
> I guess that, if you're in Microsoft's shoes, it makes sense. If you
> can't write software or protocols that can stably walk and chew gum,
> program in a limit that prevents the user from telling it to do so.
>   -- Jonathan Patschke, on limitations in Active Directory
>