Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by chromas on Wednesday October 03 2018, @06:00PM   Printer-friendly
from the every-site-a-framework dept.

Physicist Igor Ljubuncic writes about the dearth of offline graphical web editors. These used to be quite common, but all the established names are long gone and even some of the newer ones are looking neglected. He summarizes what's still available now in 2018 and the relative strengths and weaknesses of these remaining tools.

Once upon a time, there were dozens of WYSIWYG editors, all offering their own wonders, as well as their own range of inconsistencies, garbage code and functionality. I came across the old Nvu back in 2006, upgraded to Kompozer when this one came about, and kept on using it ever since in some form or another, as it offers the simplicity of writing stuff without having to worry about code, plus some serious usability benefits that no other program seems to offer. But then, Kompozer hasn't seen any updates in a long while, and some refresh is needed. What do we have on the table?

And I'll add in a general question, what is your preferred method of dealing with either HTML or CSS or both? Strangely mine is Emacs for the HTML and vi for the CSS.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Wednesday October 03 2018, @06:13PM (1 child)

    by wonkey_monkey (279) on Wednesday October 03 2018, @06:13PM (#743534) Homepage

    Yeah okay my brain is not engaged today.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday October 03 2018, @10:10PM

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Wednesday October 03 2018, @10:10PM (#743696) Homepage

    But yeah - if you write semantically clear HTML, or templates, then you should be able to compose them - knowing what they will look like - as plain text in dum-dum-dahhhh - whatever text editor you're happiest editing in. If it doesn't look correct, your CSS and your HTML should be simple enough to easily work out where you went wrong. And if you can't, then your HTML and your CSS are not simple enough[*].

    Most of his examples were basically just GUI text editors, not WYSIWYG ones anyway, so you were as on-point as TFA's FA!

    [* If, however, your HTML looks like:
    <div class='content wc-12'><div class='main-content xp-2001'><div class='content-body wtf-69'><div class='content-main bbq-24'><div id='content content-main'><div class='header big biggish'>...
    then just kill yourself, you're producing worse shit than the worst of the tag-soup of the 90s. And it's your own damn fault that it doesn't look like what you intended - because you never made your intentions sufficiently lucidly anyway.]

    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves