Macromedia has 30day free trials on everything right now! me
"Henri Sivonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Lars Behrens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Henri Sivonen wrote: > > > > > Actually, the HTML markup produced by OOo Writer/Web is exceptionally > > > sane (often cleaner than the markup produced by Nvu/Composer) if you > > > don't edit styles in OOo but add a style sheet later. > > > > But what's the use of a wysiwyg editor then? ;-) > > I don't use it as a "WYSIWYG" editor (problematic concept considering > the Web). I use it as an editor that allows me to write lightly > structured (headings, paragraphs, lists) documents without having to > type tags. > > > And how do I put the style markup in? > > Using your favorite text editor or a small script. > > > A short test showed that OOo writes the source in all uppercase letters > > That's OK. > > > and still makes use of <b></b> and <i></i> tags. > > If you ask for bold or italics, <b></b> and <i></i> are the most > appropriate markup. If you want generic emphasis, ask for generic > emphasis, which is supported as well. <span style='font-style: italic;'> > instead of <i> is silly. > > http://mpt.net.nz/archive/2004/05/09/semantic > > > Don't want to start a flame war here, but still I would say, that someone > > with few or no knowledge of web coding is better off with nvu. > > Their paragraphs won't be. Hopefully this area will be improved as the > development of Nvu goes on. Also, I don't like tho way Nvu sprinkles > style='...' all over if you are not careful. > > I use Nvu for retouching existing pages, because Nvu doesn't mess > everything up in that case like OOo does. > > -- > Henri Sivonen > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://iki.fi/hsivonen/ > Mozilla Web Author FAQ: http://mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html _______________________________________________ mozilla-editor mailing list [email protected] http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-editor
