HTML Editor

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Phonedude, Jul 28, 2008.

  1. Phonedude

    Phonedude Guest

    I have been using Notepad to edit the website I've volunteered to create and
    maintain -- http://www.mclriverview.org and have finally got to the point
    where I am looking for something a little more efficient to use. I see some
    good things about Coffeecup, but was wondering what the experienced users of
    this group use. Note that I am not yet interested in Java or scripting and
    have been simply maintaining my CSS and HTML in notepad and for now that's
    all I want to enhance.

    Larry
    Phonedude, Jul 28, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Phonedude

    Guest

    On Jul 28, 2:32 pm, "Phonedude" <> wrote:
    > I have been using Notepad to edit the website I've volunteered to create and
    > maintain --http://www.mclriverview.organd have finally got to the point
    > where I am looking for something a little more efficient to use.  I see some
    > good things about Coffeecup, but was wondering what the experienced users of
    > this group use.  Note that I am not yet interested in Java or scripting and
    > have been simply maintaining my CSS and HTML in notepad  and for now that's
    > all I want to enhance.
    >
    > Larry


    I've been looking for one myself and unfortunately as soon as you
    start going across platform and scripting (server-side) you quickly
    run out of options.

    I ended up being back to text editors.

    Old Mozilla (pre-Firefox) had a fairly decent editor though, not 100%
    WYSIWYG, but close. And you could always generate HTML that was
    working in IE in it.
    And you could also grab a page from the web and edit it without too
    much overhead, like a billion folders etc.
    , Jul 28, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On 2008-07-28, Phonedude wrote:
    > I have been using Notepad to edit the website I've volunteered to create and
    > maintain -- http://www.mclriverview.org and have finally got to the point
    > where I am looking for something a little more efficient to use. I see some
    > good things about Coffeecup, but was wondering what the experienced users of
    > this group use. Note that I am not yet interested in Java or scripting and
    > have been simply maintaining my CSS and HTML in notepad and for now that's
    > all I want to enhance.


    GNU emacs

    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson, webmaster <http://Woodbine-Gerrard.com>
    ===================================================================
    Author:
    Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Jul 28, 2008
    #3
  4. Phonedude

    Nik Coughlin Guest

    "Phonedude" <> wrote in message
    news:g6ldtb$gc9$...
    >I have been using Notepad to edit the website I've volunteered to create
    >and maintain -- http://www.mclriverview.org and have finally got to the
    >point where I am looking for something a little more efficient to use. I
    >see some good things about Coffeecup, but was wondering what the
    >experienced users of this group use. Note that I am not yet interested in
    >Java or scripting and have been simply maintaining my CSS and HTML in
    >notepad and for now that's all I want to enhance.


    Notepad++
    Nik Coughlin, Jul 28, 2008
    #4
  5. On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:32:26 -0400, "Phonedude" <>
    wrote:

    >I have been using Notepad to edit the website I've volunteered to create and
    >maintain -- http://www.mclriverview.org and have finally got to the point
    >where I am looking for something a little more efficient to use. I see some
    >good things about Coffeecup, but was wondering what the experienced users of
    >this group use. Note that I am not yet interested in Java or scripting and
    >have been simply maintaining my CSS and HTML in notepad and for now that's
    >all I want to enhance.
    >

    notepad++ let you change a string in all the files you selected

    http://kompozer.sourceforge.net/ will permit you a good approach
    Raymond SCHMIT, Jul 28, 2008
    #5
  6. On Jul 28, 6:08 pm, Guy Macon <http://www.GuyMacon.com/> wrote:
    > UltraEdit.  It will pay for itself on the first day in increased
    > efficiency. yet it is still a *text* editor, not a WYSIWYMG HTML
    > editor...


    Is this not the same guy (no pun intended) that thought that notepad
    had too many features...

    --
    Travis
    Flash Crap: http://travisnewbury.blogspot.com
    Travis Newbury, Jul 29, 2008
    #6
  7. Phonedude

    Phonedude Guest

    Thanks to all of you for the input. Right now I'm going with the free
    version of coffeecup -- what I see so far I like.

    Larry
    Phonedude, Jul 29, 2008
    #7
  8. On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 22:34:52 -0400, Ed Mullen <> wrote:

    >Rick wrote:
    >> wrote:
    >>> On Jul 28, 2:32 pm, "Phonedude" <> wrote:
    >>>> I have been using Notepad to edit the website I've volunteered to
    >>>> create and
    >>>> maintain --http://www.mclriverview.organd have finally got to the point
    >>>> where I am looking for something a little more efficient to use. I
    >>>> see some
    >>>> good things about Coffeecup, but was wondering what the experienced
    >>>> users of
    >>>> this group use. Note that I am not yet interested in Java or
    >>>> scripting and
    >>>> have been simply maintaining my CSS and HTML in notepad and for now
    >>>> that's
    >>>> all I want to enhance.
    >>>>
    >>>> Larry
    >>>
    >>> I've been looking for one myself and unfortunately as soon as you
    >>> start going across platform and scripting (server-side) you quickly
    >>> run out of options.
    >>>
    >>> I ended up being back to text editors.
    >>>
    >>> Old Mozilla (pre-Firefox) had a fairly decent editor though, not 100%
    >>> WYSIWYG, but close. And you could always generate HTML that was
    >>> working in IE in it.
    >>> And you could also grab a page from the web and edit it without too
    >>> much overhead, like a billion folders etc.

    >> SeaMonkey has a pretty good editor--Called composer
    >>

    >
    >It produces crappy code. Even its successor, Nvu, still produces crappy
    >code
    >
    >There is no substitute for actually /learning/ HTML and CSS.


    Do you think that http://kompozer.sourceforge.net/ will also produce
    "crappy code" ?
    Raymond SCHMIT, Jul 29, 2008
    #8
  9. Phonedude

    David Segall Guest

    "Phonedude" <> wrote:

    >Thanks to all of you for the input. Right now I'm going with the free
    >version of coffeecup -- what I see so far I like.

    Please report back here. I tried it some time ago and it was
    impossible to switch between the text view and the WYSIWYG view
    without exiting the editor.
    David Segall, Jul 29, 2008
    #9
  10. Phonedude

    Phonedude Guest

    "David Segall" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Phonedude" <> wrote:
    >
    >>Thanks to all of you for the input. Right now I'm going with the free
    >>version of coffeecup -- what I see so far I like.

    > Please report back here. I tried it some time ago and it was
    > impossible to switch between the text view and the WYSIWYG view
    > without exiting the editor.


    The WYSIWYG editor is not included with the free version. I may upgrade at
    a later date, but for right now I just use the text editor and preview the
    results.

    Larry
    Phonedude, Jul 29, 2008
    #10
  11. On 2008-07-29, Raymond SCHMIT wrote:
    > On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 22:34:52 -0400, Ed Mullen <> wrote:
    >
    >>Rick wrote:
    >>> wrote:
    >>>> On Jul 28, 2:32 pm, "Phonedude" <> wrote:
    >>>>> I have been using Notepad to edit the website I've volunteered to
    >>>>> create and
    >>>>> maintain --http://www.mclriverview.organd have finally got to the point
    >>>>> where I am looking for something a little more efficient to use. I
    >>>>> see some
    >>>>> good things about Coffeecup, but was wondering what the experienced
    >>>>> users of
    >>>>> this group use. Note that I am not yet interested in Java or
    >>>>> scripting and
    >>>>> have been simply maintaining my CSS and HTML in notepad and for now
    >>>>> that's
    >>>>> all I want to enhance.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Larry
    >>>>
    >>>> I've been looking for one myself and unfortunately as soon as you
    >>>> start going across platform and scripting (server-side) you quickly
    >>>> run out of options.
    >>>>
    >>>> I ended up being back to text editors.
    >>>>
    >>>> Old Mozilla (pre-Firefox) had a fairly decent editor though, not 100%
    >>>> WYSIWYG, but close. And you could always generate HTML that was
    >>>> working in IE in it.
    >>>> And you could also grab a page from the web and edit it without too
    >>>> much overhead, like a billion folders etc.
    >>> SeaMonkey has a pretty good editor--Called composer
    >>>

    >>
    >>It produces crappy code. Even its successor, Nvu, still produces crappy
    >>code
    >>
    >>There is no substitute for actually /learning/ HTML and CSS.


    Hear! Hear!

    > Do you think that http://kompozer.sourceforge.net/ will also produce
    > "crappy code" ?


    I just downloaded it and created a simple page.

    The first annoyance I encountered was that it would not let me
    have an empty alt attribute in an <img> tag, (Perhaps this is
    configurable?)

    The page it produced has 8 HTML errors. Here's the page:

    <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
    <html><head><meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="content-type"><title>hw.html</title></head><body style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 153, 102);" alink="#000099" link="#000099" vlink="#990099">Hello, World Wide Web!<br><br><img style="width: 104px; height: 104px;" alt="x" src="file:///home/chris/public_html/Images/4n-t.gif"></body></html>


    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson, webmaster <http://Woodbine-Gerrard.com>
    ===================================================================
    Author:
    Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Jul 29, 2008
    #11
  12. Phonedude

    Chaddy2222 Guest

    On Jul 30, 8:48 am, "Chris F.A. Johnson" <> wrote:
    > On 2008-07-29, Raymond SCHMIT wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 22:34:52 -0400, Ed Mullen <> wrote:

    >
    > >>Rick wrote:
    > >>> wrote:
    > >>>> On Jul 28, 2:32 pm, "Phonedude" <> wrote:
    > >>>>> I have been using Notepad to edit the website I've volunteered to
    > >>>>> create and
    > >>>>> maintain --http://www.mclriverview.organdhave finally got to the point
    > >>>>> where I am looking for something a little more efficient to use.  I
    > >>>>> see some
    > >>>>> good things about Coffeecup, but was wondering what the experienced
    > >>>>> users of
    > >>>>> this group use.  Note that I am not yet interested in Java or
    > >>>>> scripting and
    > >>>>> have been simply maintaining my CSS and HTML in notepad  and for now
    > >>>>> that's
    > >>>>> all I want to enhance.

    >
    > >>>>> Larry

    >
    > >>>> I've been looking for one myself and unfortunately as soon as you
    > >>>> start going across platform and scripting (server-side) you quickly
    > >>>> run out of options.

    >
    > >>>> I ended up being back to text editors.

    >
    > >>>> Old Mozilla (pre-Firefox) had a fairly decent editor though, not 100%
    > >>>> WYSIWYG, but close. And you could always generate HTML that was
    > >>>> working in IE in it.
    > >>>> And you could also grab a page from the web and edit it without too
    > >>>> much overhead, like a billion folders etc.
    > >>> SeaMonkey has a pretty good editor--Called composer

    >
    > >>It produces crappy code.  Even its successor, Nvu, still produces crappy
    > >>code

    >
    > >>There is no substitute for actually /learning/ HTML and CSS.

    >
    >     Hear! Hear!
    >
    > > Do you think thathttp://kompozer.sourceforge.net/ will also produce
    > > "crappy code" ?

    >
    >     I just downloaded it and created a simple page.
    >
    >     The first annoyance I encountered was that it would not let me
    >     have an empty alt attribute in an <img> tag, (Perhaps this is
    >     configurable?)
    >
    >     The page it produced has 8 HTML errors. Here's the page:
    >
    > <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
    > <html><head><meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="content-type"><title>hw.html</title></head><body style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(255, 153, 102);" alink="#000099" link="#000099" vlink="#990099">Hello, World Wide Web!<br><br><img style="width: 104px; height: 104px;" alt="x" src="file:///home/chris/public_html/Images/4n-t.gif"></body></html>
    >

    To answer your question, you can tell the editor not to include alt
    text, by clicking the dialog box that says, include alt text for
    images or something like that. You need to un-check or check it
    depending on what you want. I always add alt text to images anyway
    even though at times you do not need it as much (such as for photo
    galleries).
    --
    Regards Chad. http://freewebdesignonline.org
    Chaddy2222, Jul 30, 2008
    #12
  13. On 2008-07-30, Chaddy2222 wrote:
    > On Jul 30, 8:48 am, "Chris F.A. Johnson" <> wrote:

    ....
    >> > Do you think thathttp://kompozer.sourceforge.net/ will also produce
    >> > "crappy code" ?

    ...
    >>     The first annoyance I encountered was that it would not let me
    >>     have an empty alt attribute in an <img> tag, (Perhaps this is
    >>     configurable?)


    > To answer your question, you can tell the editor not to include alt
    > text, by clicking the dialog box that says, include alt text for
    > images or something like that. You need to un-check or check it
    > depending on what you want. I always add alt text to images anyway
    > even though at times you do not need it as much (such as for photo
    > galleries).


    I don't know how I missed that check box.

    But I don't understand why it is there. What's wrong with simply
    leaving the field blank if you don't want any alt text? Komposer
    puts in an empty alt attribute if there's no text (as it should).

    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson, webmaster <http://Woodbine-Gerrard.com>
    ===================================================================
    Author:
    Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Jul 30, 2008
    #13
  14. On 2008-07-30, Neredbojias wrote:
    > On 30 Jul 2008, "Chris F.A. Johnson" <> wrote:
    >
    >>>>     The first annoyance I encountered was that it would not let me
    >>>>     have an empty alt attribute in an <img> tag, (Perhaps this is
    >>>>     configurable?)

    >>
    >>> To answer your question, you can tell the editor not to include alt
    >>> text, by clicking the dialog box that says, include alt text for
    >>> images or something like that. You need to un-check or check it
    >>> depending on what you want. I always add alt text to images anyway
    >>> even though at times you do not need it as much (such as for photo
    >>> galleries).

    >>
    >> I don't know how I missed that check box.
    >>
    >> But I don't understand why it is there. What's wrong with simply
    >> leaving the field blank if you don't want any alt text? Komposer
    >> puts in an empty alt attribute if there's no text (as it should).

    >
    > Now let's see, _you_ fucked up so it is the editor's fault for including an
    > option you believe should default automatically. Uh huh...


    Where did I say that? All I said is that the button is
    unnecessary.

    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson, webmaster <http://Woodbine-Gerrard.com>
    ===================================================================
    Author:
    Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Jul 30, 2008
    #14
  15. On Jul 29, 6:48 pm, "Chris F.A. Johnson" <> wrote:
    > On 2008-07-29, Raymond SCHMIT wrote:
    >
    >
    >     The first annoyance I encountered was that it would not let me
    >     have an empty alt attribute in an <img> tag, (Perhaps this is
    >     configurable?)
    >
    >     The page it produced has 8 HTML errors. Here's the page:
    >

    The alt attribute is required for the img tag, hence it should not be
    empty. If it is left empty it will generate HTML errors.
    Helpful person, Jul 30, 2008
    #15
  16. On 2008-07-30, Helpful person wrote:
    > On Jul 29, 6:48 pm, "Chris F.A. Johnson" <> wrote:
    >> On 2008-07-29, Raymond SCHMIT wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>     The first annoyance I encountered was that it would not let me
    >>     have an empty alt attribute in an <img> tag, (Perhaps this is
    >>     configurable?)
    >>
    >>     The page it produced has 8 HTML errors. Here's the page:
    >>

    > The alt attribute is required for the img tag, hence it should not be
    > empty. If it is left empty it will generate HTML errors.


    Wrong.

    It may be empty, but it must be there.

    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson, webmaster <http://Woodbine-Gerrard.com>
    ===================================================================
    Author:
    Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Jul 30, 2008
    #16
  17. Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Guy Macon <http://www.GuyMacon.com/>
    writing in news::

    > That would limit the choices to empty alt and alt with text.
    > The button is there so the user can choose to have no alt at all.
    >


    HTML 4.01 says "The alt attribute must be specified for the IMG and AREA
    elements. It is optional for the INPUT and APPLET elements"

    --
    Adrienne Boswell at Home
    Arbpen Web Site Design Services
    http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
    Please respond to the group so others can share
    Adrienne Boswell, Jul 31, 2008
    #17
  18. Phonedude

    dorayme Guest

    In article <>,
    Guy Macon <http://www.GuyMacon.com/> wrote:

    > Adrienne Boswell wrote:
    >
    > >Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Guy Macon <http://www.GuyMacon.com/>
    > >writing in news::
    > >
    > >> That would limit the choices to empty alt and alt with text.
    > >> The button is there so the user can choose to have no alt at all.

    > >
    > >HTML 4.01 says "The alt attribute must be specified for the IMG and AREA
    > >elements. It is optional for the INPUT and APPLET elements"

    >
    > Is the HTML editor in question advertised as being only for
    > HTML 4.01? Or can it be used to create pages in HTML 2.0 or
    > ISO/IEC 15445:2000 HTML?


    Very important that it can use HTML 2, no web development environment is
    complete without this. I think I might drive my T model Ford to have my
    afternoon swim today... must not forget to pack my more modest bathers
    from the 1920's... and load up my iPod with some Charleston...

    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Jul 31, 2008
    #18
  19. Phonedude

    Chaddy2222 Guest

    Guy Macon wrote:

    > Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
    > >
    > >Helpful person wrote:
    > >
    > >> The alt attribute is required for the img tag, hence it should not be
    > >> empty. If it is left empty it will generate HTML errors.

    > >
    > > Wrong.
    > >
    > > It may be empty, but it must be there.

    >
    > Doesn't that depend on what version of HTML you are using?
    >
    >
    >

    The editor only supports HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0.
    --
    Regards Chad. http://freewebdesignonline.org
    Chaddy2222, Jul 31, 2008
    #19
  20. Phonedude

    Chaddy2222 Guest

    Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:

    > On 2008-07-30, Chaddy2222 wrote:
    > > On Jul 30, 8:48�am, "Chris F.A. Johnson" <> wrote:

    > ...
    > >> > Do you think thathttp://kompozer.sourceforge.net/�will also produce
    > >> > "crappy code" ?

    > ..
    > >> � � The first annoyance I encountered was that it would not let me
    > >> � � have an empty alt attribute in an <img> tag, (Perhaps this is
    > >> � � configurable?)

    >
    > > To answer your question, you can tell the editor not to include alt
    > > text, by clicking the dialog box that says, include alt text for
    > > images or something like that. You need to un-check or check it
    > > depending on what you want. I always add alt text to images anyway
    > > even though at times you do not need it as much (such as for photo
    > > galleries).

    >
    > I don't know how I missed that check box.
    >
    > But I don't understand why it is there. What's wrong with simply
    > leaving the field blank if you don't want any alt text? Komposer
    > puts in an empty alt attribute if there's no text (as it should).
    >

    http://www.gregtutor.plus.com/webdesign/index.html
    --
    Regards Chad. http://freewebdesignonline.org
    Chaddy2222, Jul 31, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Stylus Studio
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    640
    Stylus Studio
    Aug 3, 2004
  2. Hatem KNANI
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    636
    Morphon Technologies
    Aug 4, 2003
  3. Stylus Studio
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    486
    Stylus Studio
    Aug 3, 2004
  4. SyncRO Soft
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    495
    SyncRO Soft
    Jul 21, 2005
  5. SyncRO Soft
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    488
    SyncRO Soft
    Sep 21, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page