By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
458,146 Members | 1,631 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 458,146 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Best authoring tool

P: n/a
Hello group,

I'm wondering which authoring tool would be most flexible and useful for
large websites using only html, css and javascrip.

So far I've tried Dreamweaver MX, but have heard BBEdit is also good. What
do you think?

Jul 24 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
32 Replies


P: n/a
In article <1112515372.0ec3eda8b6039336b6c6eaa72149c098@teran ews>,
Roman <ro***@none.com> wrote:
Hello group,

I'm wondering which authoring tool would be most flexible and useful for
large websites using only html, css and javascrip.

So far I've tried Dreamweaver MX, but have heard BBEdit is also good. What
do you think?


They do different things. Dreamweaver will allow for WYSIWYG as well as
code editing. BBEdit is a text editor with additional features to do
HTML/CSS/Java/Javascript and many other languages.

I think you'd be better served by forgetting about seeking the "best" of
anything. "That way lies madness" or at least a lot of disappointment
in your life.

I, myself, accept "good enough" and "does the job". If "Mikee likes it"
is also in there, I'm a happy camper.

--
DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee...

Jul 24 '05 #2

P: n/a
"Michael Vilain" <vi****@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:vi**************************@comcast.dca.giga news.com...
In article <1112515372.0ec3eda8b6039336b6c6eaa72149c098@teran ews>,
Roman <ro***@none.com> wrote:
They do different things. Dreamweaver will allow for WYSIWYG as well as
code editing. BBEdit is a text editor with additional features to do
HTML/CSS/Java/Javascript and many other languages.

I think you'd be better served by forgetting about seeking the "best" of
anything. "That way lies madness" or at least a lot of disappointment
in your life.

I, myself, accept "good enough" and "does the job". If "Mikee likes it"
is also in there, I'm a happy camper.


I agree... the "best" is what ever works best for you... Be it Dreamweaver,
notepad, or Geocities editor (OK, I've crossed the line on that one ;-) ).
--
SamMan
Rip it to reply

Jul 24 '05 #3

P: n/a
I'd go with Notepad though... using PHP-include modules for any function /
information that might be duplicated.

If you put everything in its own named include file then call them from your
..php file in the right order - I find it quite easy to do large-scale
projects in Notepad ;)
"SamMan" <sa*@psfdevrip-it.com> wrote in message
news:Tp****************@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com...
"Michael Vilain" <vi****@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:vi**************************@comcast.dca.giga news.com...
In article <1112515372.0ec3eda8b6039336b6c6eaa72149c098@teran ews>,
Roman <ro***@none.com> wrote:
They do different things. Dreamweaver will allow for WYSIWYG as well as
code editing. BBEdit is a text editor with additional features to do
HTML/CSS/Java/Javascript and many other languages.

I think you'd be better served by forgetting about seeking the "best" of
anything. "That way lies madness" or at least a lot of disappointment
in your life.

I, myself, accept "good enough" and "does the job". If "Mikee likes it"
is also in there, I'm a happy camper.

I agree... the "best" is what ever works best for you... Be it

Dreamweaver, notepad, or Geocities editor (OK, I've crossed the line on that one ) ).

--
SamMan
Rip it to reply

Jul 24 '05 #4

P: n/a

"Trammel" <Me@Server.com> wrote in message
news:8Z*******************@fe2.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
I'd go with Notepad though... using PHP-include modules for any function /
information that might be duplicated.


HTML editors help with speed when working on large sites. If he used Notepad
he'd be typing more code.

If you have the time, download as many HTML editors as you can that get good
reviews. Tucows has a large selection. Then open the same page from your
site in each & play with editing. Adding images, links, tables, etc.

I've used Coffee Cup's HTML Editor for years. It was more intuitive, for me,
than the rest. But you may find Dreamweaver more intuitive. Or some other
editor.

Carla
Jul 24 '05 #5

P: n/a
Trammel wrote:
I'd go with Notepad though... using PHP-include modules for any function /
information that might be duplicated.

If you put everything in its own named include file then call them from your
.php file in the right order - I find it quite easy to do large-scale
projects in Notepad ;)


No syntax highlighting? No automatic indenting? No thank you!
Jul 24 '05 #6

P: n/a
Roman wrote:
Hello group,

I'm wondering which authoring tool would be most flexible and useful for
large websites using only html, css and javascrip.

So far I've tried Dreamweaver MX, but have heard BBEdit is also good. What
do you think?


Crimson Editor. Good for more than just HTML too.

http://www.crimsoneditor.com/
Jul 24 '05 #7

P: n/a
"Roman" <ro***@none.com> wrote in message
news:1112515372.0ec3eda8b6039336b6c6eaa72149c098@t eranews...
Hello group,

I'm wondering which authoring tool would be most flexible and useful for
large websites using only html, css and javascrip.

So far I've tried Dreamweaver MX, but have heard BBEdit is also good. What
do you think?


I like the text editor HTML-Kit from www.chami.com
Jul 24 '05 #8

P: n/a
Roman <ro***@none.com> wrote in message news:<1112515372.0ec3eda8b6039336b6c6eaa72149c098@ teranews>...
Hello group,

I'm wondering which authoring tool would be most flexible and useful for
large websites using only html, css and javascrip.

So far I've tried Dreamweaver MX, but have heard BBEdit is also good. What
do you think?


I have to say I don't have so much experience with different tools,
but what I appreciate greatly with Dreamweaver (I'm more used to 4,
but MX is even better) is the site management: when you reorganize
your site, (classifying files in new directories, changing filenames,
moving stuff form one place to another...) dreamweaver updates
automatically all links. On a messy site with hundreds of pages,
that's a great help, which you don't have with text editors. But
maybe other authoring tools do that too, I don't know.
Jul 24 '05 #9

P: n/a
in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html, Roman wrote:
Hello group,

I'm wondering which authoring tool would be most flexible
Emacs.
and useful for large websites using only html, css and javascrip.
You should use some kind of preprosessing. What kind, that is up to
you...

Especially if you do something like common menu on each page...
So far I've tried Dreamweaver MX, but have heard BBEdit is also good. What
do you think?


If you have time to learn, I would choose emacs.

--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
Utrecht, NL.
Support me, buy Opera:
https://secure.bmtmicro.com/opera/bu...tml?AID=882173
Jul 24 '05 #10

P: n/a
Lauri,

I do have time; what is emac? Any links?


If you have time to learn, I would choose emacs.


Jul 24 '05 #11

P: n/a
In article <1112670428.546c56720f0bb0075ee4c43f97914411@teran ews>,
"William J. Tcherust" <wi*****@work.com> wrote:
I do have time; what is emac? Any links?

If you have time to learn, I would choose emacs.


What's wrong, google broken?

http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/wiki
http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
http://www.xemacs.org/

--
DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee...

Jul 24 '05 #12

P: n/a
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:06:54 -0500, "William J. Tcherust"
<wi*****@work.com> wrote:
I do have time; what is emac?
It's "Emacs", and it's anything you want it to be, from a rather
simple to use text editor, through a full fledged OP-system shell and
up to a full sized religion (to some people :-)
Any links?


<http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/emacs.html>

--
Rex
Jul 24 '05 #13

P: n/a
Roman wrote:
Hello group,

I'm wondering which authoring tool would be most flexible and useful for
large websites using only html, css and javascrip.

So far I've tried Dreamweaver MX, but have heard BBEdit is also good. What
do you think?


I've been using TSW WebCoder 5 since last October. It can handle HTML,
CSS, PHP and Javascript.

It's completely freeware. There is a Pro version which includes access
to documentation, but it's not really needed because the program is
very easy to learn.

http://www.tsware.net/
Jul 24 '05 #14

P: n/a
Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Jim Jaworski <jj******@mts.net>
writing in news:1M*****************@news1.mts.net:
Roman wrote:
Hello group,

I'm wondering which authoring tool would be most flexible and useful
for large websites using only html, css and javascrip.

So far I've tried Dreamweaver MX, but have heard BBEdit is also good.
What do you think?


I've been using TSW WebCoder 5 since last October. It can handle HTML,
CSS, PHP and Javascript.

It's completely freeware. There is a Pro version which includes access
to documentation, but it's not really needed because the program is
very easy to learn.

http://www.tsware.net/


Looks interesting.

--
Adrienne Boswell
http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
Please respond to the group so others can share
Jul 24 '05 #15

P: n/a

"Lauri Raittila" <la***@raittila.cjb.net> wrote in message
news:MP************************@news.individual.ne t...
in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html, Roman wrote:

Emacs.

--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
Utrecht, NL.
Support me, buy Opera:
https://secure.bmtmicro.com/opera/bu...tml?AID=882173


Lauri,

Reminds me of my UNIX days in 1984. Might as well tell people to port in
the "vi" editor to their system. Far easier to use than the "emacs" editor.

Del Ferguson
Jul 24 '05 #16

P: n/a

"Roman" <ro***@none.com> wrote in message
news:1112515372.0ec3eda8b6039336b6c6eaa72149c098@t eranews...
Hello group,

I'm wondering which authoring tool would be most flexible and useful for
large websites using only html, css and javascrip.

So far I've tried Dreamweaver MX, but have heard BBEdit is also good. What
do you think?


Roman,

Try NoteTab Lite (only if you are using a Windows system). Correct me if
I'm wrong, but I believe that BBEdit is only for a MAC, so I'm not sure what
you are looking for. If it meets your needs, pay the $19.95 for NoteTab
Pro. I've loaded NoteTab Pro with as many as 100 HTML pages for single or
multiple editing.

Del Ferguson
Jul 24 '05 #17

P: n/a
In article <M8*****************@fe04.lga>,
Del Ferguson <de********@charter.net> wrote:

"Lauri Raittila" <la***@raittila.cjb.net> wrote in message
news:MP************************@news.individual.n et...
in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html, Roman wrote:

Emacs.


Reminds me of my UNIX days in 1984. Might as well tell people to port in
the "vi" editor to their system. Far easier to use than the "emacs" editor.


vim is a rewrite of "vi" that is available on most platforms
and features syntax highlighting of HTML keywords.

http://www.vim.org/

--
= Eric Bustad, Norwegian bachelor programmer
Jul 24 '05 #18

P: n/a
"Leif K-Brooks" <eu*****@ecritters.biz> wrote in message
news:JL*****************@newshog.newsread.com...
Trammel wrote:
I'd go with Notepad though... using PHP-include modules for any function / information that might be duplicated.

If you put everything in its own named include file then call them from your .php file in the right order - I find it quite easy to do large-scale
projects in Notepad ;)


No syntax highlighting? No automatic indenting? No thank you!


Sorry... I use Notepad2 so forgot that normal Notepad dont have syntax
highlighting :¬s
Notepad2 also has line-numbering so is easy to see where you made errors in
PHP, etc :)
Jul 24 '05 #19

P: n/a

"Eric Kenneth Bustad" <ek*@hos1cad.ho.att.com> wrote in message
news:d3********@netnews.proxy.lucent.com...

vim is a rewrite of "vi" that is available on most platforms
and features syntax highlighting of HTML keywords.

http://www.vim.org/

--
= Eric Bustad, Norwegian bachelor programmer


Eric,

I guess I'll have to be like Simon Cowell of American Idol fame and say that
VIM is just OK. My personal opinion only and not to say that someone else
wouldn't like it. If I "really" want to use VI again, I still have an old,
old copy of MKS Tools VI on my PC. Granted, it is DOS-based, but it
satisfies any cravings for my previous life and is sometimes quicker for
smaller projects. I still have my old VI User's Handbook near the PC. I
guess that if I really wanted to go that route again, I'd dump Microsoft
Windows and go to LINUX, but I won't. I'm one of those few that actually
like Microsoft. Although, starting to get dated, NoteTab Pro seems to be
the best for my HTML coding. With HTML, XHTML, CSS, Tidy and Validation
libraries, it gets the job done. I've tried most of the other "pad-type"
programs and they just didn't live up to my expectations. Anything else has
too many bells and whistles that I don't really need--and their cost would
bend my pension.

Cheers,

Del Ferguson
Jul 24 '05 #20

P: n/a
Unless, you really want take a large course on vi/vim, I would just
download Cream for Vim (http://cream.sourceforge.net/). It's a real
easy configuration of VIM. It pretty much acts like notepad, but
includes syntax highlighting for a large number of technologies
(including html, css, php, etc.) Regular expression searches and the
works. I like it a lot and thats all I use.

For a large site, guess what! That's what style sheets are for! Don't
foget "copy, paste" can be a useful tool.

I guess it just depends on what you are comfortable with. I hate
WYSIWYG editors, including Dreamweaver. Dreamweaver is supposedly the
best out there. ITS CRAP. Always rearranging my code, not
appropriately displaying my DIV elements with absolute positioning,
etc. I don't know about you, but I'm just find with a normal text
editor.

-Doug

Jul 24 '05 #21

P: n/a
DM
Del Ferguson wrote:
"Roman" <ro***@none.com> wrote in message
news:1112515372.0ec3eda8b6039336b6c6eaa72149c098@t eranews...
Hello group,

I'm wondering which authoring tool would be most flexible and useful for
large websites using only html, css and javascrip.

So far I've tried Dreamweaver MX, but have heard BBEdit is also good. What
do you think?

Roman,

Try NoteTab Lite (only if you are using a Windows system). Correct me if
I'm wrong, but I believe that BBEdit is only for a MAC, so I'm not sure what
you are looking for. If it meets your needs, pay the $19.95 for NoteTab
Pro. I've loaded NoteTab Pro with as many as 100 HTML pages for single or
multiple editing.

Del Ferguson


NoteTab is a very good text editor. I use it all the time. But if you're going
to be spending hours and hours working on a website, I'd recommend Dreamweaver
MX. It has some flaws, I admit, but it provides the HTML and CSS features to
support serious Web development.

I think that would work better than a text editor such as BBEdit, Notepad,
Notetab, Textpad, Wordpad, emacs, or VI. They're all great tools for editing
text and some of them offer Web-specific features such as syntax highlighting
and code fomatting, but they are not dedicated Web development tools.

If you are going to stick with a text editor though, I recommend BBEdit. It
probably has as many HTML specific features as any of the others and on top of
that it has built-in FTP support. That can be a huge time-saver. (NoteTab also
has FTP support, but it isn't nearly as well implemented.)
Jul 24 '05 #22

P: n/a
in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html, Del Ferguson wrote:

"Lauri Raittila" <la***@raittila.cjb.net> wrote:
Emacs.

[pleace don't quote sigs, and snip extra attributions]
Reminds me of my UNIX days in 1984.
Emacs in 1984 was not as good as it is today. Especially HTML stuff,
reason should be obvious..

Anyway, I have only used emacs for 3 years.
Might as well tell people to port in the "vi" editor to their system.
Usually no need for porting, I believe some version of vi is available to
almost as many platforms as emacs.
Far easier to use than the "emacs" editor.


But for person used to windows software, I think both are hard to
learn... I don't think vi(m) has more features than usual good GUI text
editors. I don't know vim much though. (please, follow-ups for emacs vs.
vi debate to dev/null.)

Anyway, I suggested Emacs because it is flexible, and OP asked for
flexible. Is there anything that comes even close?

With emacs, you can easily change everythng, including remapping all keys
like letters and punctuation. Some people would think it is not necessary
to be able to redefine any key on fly. Those people have never used 101
button Finnish keyboard layout for writing HTML. (to curious, that layout
has no key for neither < nor >. With emacs, this was easy to solve, even
if I had no admistrative right of that computer... of course I was
running emacs on server using java based SSH as well. This is also not
possible with most "modern" text editors.)

Time to learn everything in emacs is most likely equal to infinity (and
makes no sence), but it is not too hard to learn, if you have time to use
for learning one feature at time. Good thing is that limits of editor are
quite far, so you can learn the most important stuff first. And of
course, most important stuff is different for everybody. Some of the most
useful things for me have not been in any other editor I have tried...

1. Ability to run it from any computer, and continue where I was
(actually possible for every text mode editor running on unix)
2. Multible views to same document
3. interactive RegEx replace on multible files (files selectable by
regexp) (using external library)
4. Moving in document is powerful, and context avare (e.g. sentence
forward)
5. Configuration is easy to move between machines/users/platforms

Most of the other stuff I have found in some other editors, but usually
something is missing...

--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
Utrecht, NL.
Support me, buy Opera:
https://secure.bmtmicro.com/opera/bu...tml?AID=882173
Jul 24 '05 #23

P: n/a
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 08:18:56 -0700, "Del Ferguson"
<de********@charter.net> wrote:

[...]
I guess I'll have to be like Simon Cowell of American Idol fame and say that
VIM is just OK. My personal opinion only and not to say that someone else
wouldn't like it. If I "really" want to use VI again, I still have an old,
old copy of MKS Tools VI on my PC. Granted, it is DOS-based, but it
satisfies any cravings for my previous life and is sometimes quicker for
smaller projects. I still have my old VI User's Handbook near the PC. I
guess that if I really wanted to go that route again, I'd dump Microsoft
Windows and go to LINUX, but I won't. I'm one of those few that actually
like Microsoft. Although, starting to get dated, NoteTab Pro seems to be
the best for my HTML coding. With HTML, XHTML, CSS, Tidy and Validation
libraries, it gets the job done. I've tried most of the other "pad-type"
programs and they just didn't live up to my expectations. Anything else has
too many bells and whistles that I don't really need--and their cost would
bend my pension.


Please Del, would it be possible to find it in your heart, a willingness
to break up your post into comprehensible bits and pieces.

That block of "noise" you posted is not a usable piece of text

--
Rex

Jul 24 '05 #24

P: n/a
DM <sp*****@devnu11.com> wrote in message news:<42***********************@news.cablerocket.c om>...
But if you're going
to be spending hours and hours working on a website, I'd recommend Dreamweaver
MX. It has some flaws, I admit, but it provides the HTML and CSS features to
support serious Web development.


Yes, that's what I also wanted to point out. There's a difference
between a code editor and a site manager. All the editors here only
do the code thing, but do not (as far as I know) help you manage the
site. And when you have hundreds of pages, such a tool comes in handy
! I find Dreamweaver great in that respect.

cheers,
Patrick.
Jul 24 '05 #25

P: n/a
JRS: In article <8Z*******************@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk >,
dated Sun, 3 Apr 2005 20:02:12, seen in news:comp.infosystems.www.author
ing.html, Trammel <Me@Server.com> posted :
I'd go with Notepad though... using PHP-include modules for any function /
information that might be duplicated.

If you put everything in its own named include file then call them from your
.php file in the right order - I find it quite easy to do large-scale
projects in Notepad ;)


Don't top-post or over-quote.

Using only Notepad is silly - because there are many better plain-text
editors readily available, some being free. I use PFE, although alas
its development has stopped; it has only one missing feature that I
regret, and I can use another editor (generally the BP7 IDE) when I need
that.

Unless, of course, later Notepad is *very* much better than the version
I have.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 IE 4 ©
<URL:http://www.jibbering.com/faq/> JL/RC: FAQ of news:comp.lang.javascript
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-index.htm> jscr maths, dates, sources.
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/jscr/&c, FAQ items, links.
Jul 24 '05 #26

P: n/a

"Jan Roland Eriksson" <jr****@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:d8********************************@4ax.com...
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 08:18:56 -0700, "Del Ferguson"
<de********@charter.net> wrote:

[...]
I guess I'll have to be like Simon Cowell of American Idol fame
and say that
VIM is just OK. My personal opinion only and not to say that
someone else
wouldn't like it. If I "really" want to use VI again, I still
have an old,
old copy of MKS Tools VI on my PC. Granted, it is DOS-based, but
it
satisfies any cravings for my previous life and is sometimes
quicker for
smaller projects. I still have my old VI User's Handbook near
the PC. I
guess that if I really wanted to go that route again, I'd dump
Microsoft
Windows and go to LINUX, but I won't. I'm one of those few that
actually
like Microsoft. Although, starting to get dated, NoteTab Pro
seems to be
the best for my HTML coding. With HTML, XHTML, CSS, Tidy and
Validation
libraries, it gets the job done. I've tried most of the other
"pad-type"
programs and they just didn't live up to my expectations.
Anything else has
too many bells and whistles that I don't really need--and their
cost would
bend my pension.


Please Del, would it be possible to find it in your heart, a
willingness
to break up your post into comprehensible bits and pieces.

That block of "noise" you posted is not a usable piece of text

--
Rex


Rex,

I think my "block of noise" got lost in translation. Sometimes a
particular mail reader causes confusion. Lauri apparently
understood my comments, so I'll just pass on anything further.
I'll have to read the FAQs about snips and quotes, though. Cheers.

Del Ferguson
Jul 24 '05 #27

P: n/a
in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html, Del Ferguson wrote:

I think my "block of noise" got lost in translation.
No, I don't think so.
Sometimes a
particular mail reader causes confusion.
Yes, it is usually google groups beta, but OE is the very second.
Lauri apparently understood my comments,
I never read the reply with block of noise.
I'll have to read the FAQs about snips and quotes, though. Cheers.


Good. I usually killfile people that make 3 bad posts, but maybe I delay
that a bit... Here is one resource:
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html

--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
Utrecht, NL.
Support me, buy Opera:
https://secure.bmtmicro.com/opera/bu...tml?AID=882173
Jul 24 '05 #28

P: n/a

"Lauri Raittila" <la***@raittila.cjb.net> wrote in message
news:MP***********************@news.individual.net ...
in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html, Del Ferguson wrote:
I'll have to read the FAQs about snips and quotes...

Good. I usually killfile people that make 3 bad posts, but maybe
I delay
that a bit... Here is one resource:
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html


Read and understand.
Jul 24 '05 #29

P: n/a
Jan Roland Eriksson <jr****@newsguy.com> wrote:
It's "Emacs", and it's anything you want it to be, from a rather
simple to use text editor, through a full fledged OP-system shell and
up to a full sized religion (to some people :-)


Yeah, it's anything you want it to be, it only misses to have a good
editor. Fortunately for it's users it has Vim emulation. XDDD

--
Cheers,
Ángel
Jul 24 '05 #30

P: n/a
Roman wrote:
I'm wondering which authoring tool would be most flexible and useful
for large websites using only html, css and javascrip.


Editor:
PSPad
http://www.pspad.com/

After trying: Notepad2; Programmers Notepad; ConText; Hapedit; TSW Webpad;
SciTe ...
I recommend pspad"
1. Freeware.
2. Syntax Highlighting.
3. The most complete editing functions (eg "Remove email quoting", Swap
lines, block select, ...)
4. Excellent "Tool Panel": navigation for files; Code walker.
5. Allows multiple documents. "Tab browsing". You can middle click on the
tab to close the document (I feature I really wanted).

TSW webpad second place.

Storing code snippets (Although pspad already has a library of customizable
code snipets):
ArsClip
http://www.joejoesoft.com/ac.php
1. Donationware.
2. Stores code snippets that become available regardless of which editor you
are using. (it runs in the taskbar)
3. Stores last 10 copies so you can easily paste any of these.

FTP:
Filezilla
http://sourceforge.net/projects/filezilla
1. A straightforward FTP client that seems to provide everything you need.



Sep 25 '05 #31

P: n/a

EditPlus.

http://www.editplus.com

Excellent.

Mason C (no connection with EditPlus)
Sep 28 '05 #32

P: n/a
> > I'm wondering which authoring tool would be most flexible and
useful for large websites using only html, css and javascript.

Editor: PSPad
http://www.pspad.com/


Zeus for Windows

http://www.zeusedit.com/features.html

Zeus has features like project/workspace, syntax highlighting,
macro scripting (zeus is fully scriptable using java script),
integrated version control etc.

You can even check HTML files for W3C conformance from within
the editor, by makeing use of the Tidy HTML utility:

http://www.zeusedit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=194
FTP: Filezilla


Zeus has built-in seamless FTP/SFTP editing.

Note: Zeus is shareware (45 day trial).

Jussi Jumppanen
Author: Zeus for Windows

Sep 29 '05 #33

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.