Re: [WSG] editor

;ve been using those since before I joined the list... so I was one step ahead in that department at least lol. Thanks for the links! Artie Original Message From: "Alex James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re:[WSG] editor Date: 12/6/2

RE: [WSG] editor

Artemis,   If you're moving to Firefox then you can install the 'HMTL Tidy' extension the list have informed you of, this hopefully will help when hand-coding in the following open source software I'm recommending: Notepad++ http://notepad-plus.sourceforge.net/uk/site.htm Download http://sou

Re: [WSG] editor

nal Message From: "Conyers, Dwayne, Mr [C]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'wsg@webstandardsgroup.org'" Subject: Re:[WSG] editor Date: 12/5/2005 07:24 Artemis ink wired: Could you pretty please elaborate on "rubbish"? I mean, I know what you

RE: [WSG] editor

Artemis ink wired: > Could you pretty please elaborate on "rubbish"? > I mean, I know what you're saying, but I am > curious as to what code Frontpage and Dreamweaver > puts out that is rubbish. Like many M$ tools, FrontPage assumes that it is smarter than you are and puts non-standard items

Re: [WSG] editor

On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 22:53:30 -0500, Jay Gilmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: When I first started really getting into web design I began with DW To be clear, and get back to editors, I posted in favor of DW8. That's with an _8_. And mentioned I use it in code-view only. But, I also mention

Re: [WSG] editor

Christian Montoya wrote: On 12/3/05, Lachlan Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Be aware that an XML 1.0 parser that was not built for XML 1.1 as well, will fail with a well-formedness error if version="1.1" is encountered in the declaration. For XML 1.0, the XML declaration is optional. Wait, s

Re: [WSG] editor

Anne van Kesteren wrote: There was this note once from the W3C which said that the XML Style Sheet PI should be used when the media type of the XHTML file is application/xhtml+xml[1]. And as "should" is similar to a "must"... Ah, I see, cheers Anne. On the "should" issue: from http://www.rfc-

Re: [WSG] editor

On 12/3/05, Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Christian Montoya wrote: > > > Wait, so you are saying that I could serve application/xhtml+xml to > > modern browsers without the xml declaration? What about declaring the > > stylesheets in xml declarations at the top of the document? I th

Re: [WSG] editor

Christian Montoya wrote: Wait, so you are saying that I could serve application/xhtml+xml to modern browsers without the xml declaration? What about declaring the stylesheets in xml declarations at the top of the document? I thought that was required. As we're talking about xhtml (rather than

Re: [WSG] editor

On 12/3/05, Lachlan Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Be aware that an XML 1.0 parser that was not built for XML 1.1 as well, > will fail with a well-formedness error if version="1.1" is encountered > in the declaration. For XML 1.0, the XML declaration is optional. Wait, so you are saying that I

Re: [WSG] editor

Artemis wrote: I'm confused lol. My personal site is XHTML and I don't get any popup box when viewing in IE. That is because the MIME type sent in the HTTP Content-Type header would be set to text/html. As has been discussed in this thread, the correct MIME type is application/xhtml+xml, but

Re: [WSG] editor

Artemis wrote: I'm confused lol. My personal site is XHTML and I don't get any popup box when viewing in IE. What is this used for? Why would the average personal site need it? If you could explain in "beginner speak", I would greatly appreciate it :) Information at the end of these links,

Re: [WSG] editor

Artemis wrote: Could you pretty please elaborate on "rubbish"? I mean, I know what you're saying, but I am curious as to what code Frontpage and Dreamweaver puts out that is rubbish. I've seen it said so many times, but no one ever elaborates. Many thanks, Artemis Artemi

Re: [WSG] editor

essage From: Lachlan Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re:[WSG] editor Date: 12/1/2005 19:31 Try this in IE: http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/wrongWithIE/?chapter=XHTML&withHeader=1 Oops, that's served as application/xhtml+xml, so it won't work

Re: [WSG] editor

essage From: Lachlan Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re:[WSG] editor Date: 12/1/2005 18:38 Avoid MS Frontpage like the plague, it will output rubbish for even the most experienced users. ** The

Re: [WSG] editor

Hi Lori Welcome to the list HTML Tidy is a third party tool, rather than an editor. It comes in very handy when you want to convert some code to standards compliant code. Your best introduction to Tidy is probably via the Firefox extension @ https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?appl

Re: [WSG] editor

On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 21:38:31 -0500, Steve Clason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'd suggest avoiding WYSIWYG editors (Dreamweaver, Frontpage, etc.) FrontPlague, yes - avoid it. DreamWeaver 8, i'd think about. It's pricy (compared to NotePad and TextEdit), sure, but it has excellent CSS support

Re: [WSG] editor

Lachlan Hunt wrote: Try this in IE: http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/wrongWithIE/?chapter=XHTML&withHeader=1 Oops, that's served as application/xhtml+xml, so it won't work. Here's the same article as text/html: http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/wrongWithIE/?chapter=XHTML One other thing that doesn't

Re: [WSG] editor

Matthew Cruickshank wrote: Lachlan Hunt wrote: Since you're new, you might want to stick with HTML4 until a) browser support for XHTML increases (IE does not support XHTML), Heh... please elabourate on how IE doesn't support XHTML. Try this in IE: http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/wrongWithIE/?c

Re: [WSG] editor

Lachlan Hunt wrote: Since you're new, you might want to stick with HTML4 until a) browser support for XHTML increases (IE does not support XHTML), Heh... please elabourate on how IE doesn't support XHTML. .Matthew Cruickshank http://holloway.co.nz/

Re: [WSG] editor

Lori Cole wrote: I am new to (trying to learn how) constructing standards conforming web pages using XHTML Since you're new, you might want to stick with HTML4 until a) browser support for XHTML increases (IE does not support XHTML), and b) you've learned and understand all the differences be

Re: [WSG] editor

Lori Cole wrote: I am new to (trying to learn how) constructing standards conforming web pages using XHTML and would like to know what HTML editor you folks that are light years ahead of me would recommend? Like HTMLTidy? I use it to debug other peoples pages (o

Re: [WSG] editor

On 12/1/2005 6:43 PM Lori Cole wrote: I am new to (trying to learn how) constructing standards conforming web pages using XHTML and would like to know what HTML editor you folks that are light years ahead of me would recommend? Like HTMLTidy? I am Windows based with IE v6 which I will soon be

Re: [WSG] editor

Before we get a flood of posts along the lines of "my favourite editor is" and "mine too" ... Have you looked at the resources section of the WSG website? http://webstandardsgroup.org/resources/ Regards -- Bert Doorn, Better Web Design http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/ Fast-loading, user-fri

RE: [WSG] editor

From: Lori Cole > ...using XHTML and would like to know what HTML editor > Like HTMLTidy? HTML-Kit (incorporates Tidy) will work, as will just about any plain text editor, with or without syntax highlighting. EditPad, jEdit, Notetab and so on. jEdit is pretty clever and it runs on most platforms

[WSG] editor

I am new to (trying to learn how) constructing standards conforming web pages using XHTML and would like to know what HTML editor you folks that are light years ahead of me would recommend?  Like HTMLTidy?  I am Windows based with IE v6 which I will soon be switching to Firefox based on thi

Re: [WSG] Editor Controls

, 2005 1:08 AM Subject: [WSG] Editor Controls Hi all,   I’m looking for some advice on editor controls (like JS controls) for a CMS type ‘thing’ I’m building.   Basically, it needs to be a rich edit control that’s simple for users to use.   However:   Must

Re: [WSG] Editor Controls

On Sun, 2005-08-07 at 15:08 +1000, Tatham Oddie (Fuel Advance) wrote: > Hi all, > I’m looking for some advice on editor controls (like JS controls) for > a CMS type ‘thing’ I’m building. First off, I'm foreseeing an admin saying this should be on the CMS list instead... > Any ideas? ... but yes,

[WSG] Editor Controls

Hi all,   I’m looking for some advice on editor controls (like JS controls) for a CMS type ‘thing’ I’m building.   Basically, it needs to be a rich edit control that’s simple for users to use.   However:   Must produce XHTML Must only produce p, ul, ol, li, a, img, code, dl,