HTML Editor

[tomy_baseo]

I'm new to HTML and want to learn the basics by learning to code by hand
(with the assistance of an HTML editor to eliminate repetitive tasks).
Can anyone recommend a good, basic HTML editor that's a step beyond
Notepad (not a WYSIWYG tool). Thanks.

[Barry Pearson]

tomy_baseo wrote:

I'm new to HTML and want to learn the basics by learning to code by
hand (with the assistance of an HTML editor to eliminate repetitive
tasks). Can anyone recommend a good, basic HTML editor that's a step
beyond Notepad (not a WYSIWYG tool). Thanks.

A question - why not a WYSIWYG tool as well? (I can fully understand an answer
"because it costs too much"!)

The reason I ask is that I use Dreamweaver (4), which has a design-view
(WYSIWYG) mode, and code-view mode, and a split-screen mode. It can be very
useful to be able to type in the design-view section and see the code appear
as you type in the code-view section, and vice-versa.

I am not trying to "sell" D4. It has its faults. I haven't tried enough others
to be confident in a specific recommendation. But I can confidently say that
it is possible to learn a lot by watching what code a WYSIWYG editor produces.
And also useful to get a rapid feedback from the code you write.

(Personally, the main reason I chose D4 was because I was told it had adequate
site-management. It appears to meet my needs).

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.Barry.Pearson.name/photography/
http://www.BirdsAndAnimals.info/
http://www.ChildSupportAnalysis.co.uk/

[Vincent Gardet]

"tomy_baseo " a écrit dans le message de news:

I'm new to HTML and want to learn the basics by learning to code by hand
(with the assistance of an HTML editor to eliminate repetitive tasks).
Can anyone recommend a good, basic HTML editor that's a step beyond
Notepad (not a WYSIWYG tool). Thanks.

PSPad is a very nice (and free) tool :
http://www.pspad.com/index_en.html
--
Vincent Gardet

[Alan J. Flavell]

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003, Barry Pearson wrote:

A question - why not a WYSIWYG tool as well?
In HTML, "what you get" is a marked-up logical structure. Is that
what you see?

If you meant "why not a graphical previewing editor?", that might be
different.
(I can fully understand an answer "because it costs too much"!)

Like Mozilla Composer, you mean? :-}

And I can partially understand the answer: "because, in relation to
the WWW, the term WYSIWYG doesn't really mean what it says, and
everyone knows that it really means a graphical previewing editor".

But I don't agree with it: large numbers of casual[1] web authors
really _do_ believe that they are doing DTP, and then get
unnecessarily confused and dispirited when they find out what the web
is _really_ doing to their creations.

As someone else said, WYSINWOG. And as I said, WYSIJOPR.

cheers

[1] I suppose I have to stress once again that this doesn't mean you,
bearing in mind the number of occasions that you've appeared to take
some general remark of mine as if it was an affront to you personally.

[Peter Foti]

"tomy_baseo " <to********@sbc global.net> wrote in message
news:Bz******** *******@newssvr 23.news.prodigy .com...

I'm new to HTML and want to learn the basics by learning to code by hand
(with the assistance of an HTML editor to eliminate repetitive tasks).
Can anyone recommend a good, basic HTML editor that's a step beyond
Notepad (not a WYSIWYG tool). Thanks.

Personally, I like Macromedia Homesite (formerly owned by Allaire). The
interface is similar to Dreamweaver, and has some helpful methods for
creating elements in your code, but it's not a WYSIWYG tool (though it does
allow you to switch between editing mode and a view of what the output looks
like). Great tool.
Regards,
Peter Foti

[Barry Pearson]

Alan J. Flavell wrote:

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003, Barry Pearson wrote:

A question - why not a WYSIWYG tool as well?
In HTML, "what you get" is a marked-up logical structure. Is that
what you see?

Fair comment. But remember that Dreamweaver is using the styles at the same
time, and can even edit the styles, so it isn't JUST the mark-up you are
seeing. It is having a stab at what the combined mark-up & styles would look
like under a range of conditions. And I observe that what I see in D4 is often
somewhat like what I see later in my set of browsers with their default
settings. After all, if I have table mark-up, and a CSS that specifies sizes &
colours, D4 is entitled to make a good guess about what lots of people will
see. Now some UAs may render that as the smell of dog poo or the taste of
unoaked Chardonney, but perhaps with the right extension even that can be
previewed. (I don't think I'll take the dog poo extension!)

(Since version 4 is limited in its ability to display the document styled
according to the styles in use, the more I put into the CSS, the less like
WYSIWYG it actually looks).
If you meant "why not a graphical previewing editor?", that might be
different.
OK, but I think where this is leading is that nothing in the world is
"WYSIWYG" except the absolutely final rendering. DTP isn't - you may print it
on a B&W printer, or run the electronic version through a speech-generator. In
other words, the term "WYSIWYG" always implicitly needs qualifying. And with
the web it needs a bit more qualification that when the term is used in other
contexts. I see no reason to scrap the term in all circumstances, and little
reason to scrap the term in this case.

(I can fully understand an answer "because it costs too much"!)

Like Mozilla Composer, you mean? :-}

I'd forgotten that! I must try the editors I have in UAs. I guess the one you
mention is the one I have in Netscape 7.1? And there is another in Amaya (hm!)
And I can partially understand the answer: "because, in relation to
the WWW, the term WYSIWYG doesn't really mean what it says, and
everyone knows that it really means a graphical previewing editor".
See above - I don't think it ever literally means what it says, even away from
the WWW. Different qualifications apply in different cases.
But I don't agree with it: large numbers of casual[1] web authors
really _do_ believe that they are doing DTP, and then get
unnecessarily confused and dispirited when they find out what the web
is _really_ doing to their creations.

As someone else said, WYSINWOG. And as I said, WYSIJOPR.
I found WYSIJOPR (only) in a German page on the web, where the English version
of this term was given. So I used Google to translate the whole page, and the
English translation of the English term became: "What You lake Is Just One
Possible Rendering"! Chuckle!
cheers

[1] I suppose I have to stress once again that this doesn't mean you,
bearing in mind the number of occasions that you've appeared to take
some general remark of mine as if it was an affront to you personally.

I am affronted by that casual remark!

(No I'm not - I just like clarity, and sometimes that means challenging things
where I think people might make the wrong link between what I said and
someone's response. I've had some astonishing things attributed to me that
have turned out to be other people's responses).

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.Barry.Pearson.name/photography/
http://www.BirdsAndAnimals.info/
http://www.ChildSupportAnalysis.co.uk/

[Eckhard Rotte]

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 01:50:25 GMT, tomy_baseo wrote:

Can anyone recommend a good, basic HTML editor that's a step beyond
Notepad (not a WYSIWYG tool). Thanks.

Try out TopStyle Pro <http://www.bradsoft.co m/topstyle/>.
For me it's the best HTML/CSS - editor for Windows at the moment,
especially if you want to learn _correct_ HTML.



--
Eckhard Rotte.

[Alan J. Flavell]

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003, Barry Pearson wrote:

As someone else said, WYSINWOG. And as I said, WYSIJOPR.
I found WYSIJOPR (only) in a German page on the web,

I know the one you mean; but Google Groups earliest reference is
Pi************* *************** **... lus06.cern.ch
from June 1996.
of this term was given. So I used Google to translate the whole page, and the
English translation of the English term became: "What You lake Is Just One
Possible Rendering"! Chuckle!

I get the joke ;-)

You heard the one about the "hydraulic ram" that ended up translated
via Russian and back to "male water sheep" ?

[Peter Foti]

"Eckhard Rotte" <us********@ero tte.de> wrote in message
news:pk******** *************** *****@40tude.ne t...

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 01:50:25 GMT, tomy_baseo wrote:

Can anyone recommend a good, basic HTML editor that's a step beyond
Notepad (not a WYSIWYG tool). Thanks.

Try out TopStyle Pro <http://www.bradsoft.co m/topstyle/>.
For me it's the best HTML/CSS - editor for Windows at the moment,
especially if you want to learn _correct_ HTML.

That reminds me, TopStyle is included with Homesite. But there may have
been newer versions of TopStyle released since the last version of Homesite.

-Peter

[Eckhard Rotte]

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:59:16 -0400, Peter Foti wrote:

That reminds me, TopStyle is included with Homesite. But there may have
been newer versions of TopStyle released since the last version of Homesite.

There's a Version of Topstyle Lite included with Homesite which contains a
small subset of the feature set of TopStyle Pro. At first, Top Style is a
CSS Editor but it has become a more than fully featured HTML-Editor since
Version 3.0. I'm not sure, but you would miss a lot of HTML features in TS
Lite.

--
Eckhard Rotte.