Re: re: wysiwyg www-editors..

On Friday 22 August 2003 13:59, Adam Ophir Shapira wrote:
 
> I'm not going to talk-down to someone who wants a
> WYSIWYG tool. However, I *will* point out to such a
> person that there *are* *advantages* to coding in
> HTML directly: first and foremost the fact that this
> way you have more direct control over the code.

Ah, the oft-mentioned shop worn "control issue".
To which I say, who give a rip?  If the WYSIWYG tool
does as promised (and some of them do most of the
time) then what value is the "control".  Results are
what matter, not CONTORL?

> As for your statement that HTML is obsolete, I strongly
> disagree with that statement. There are several browsers
> out there that still can't view XML. For example, I'm
> running RH-Linux 7.3 and when I try to view XML I
> get a bunch of garbage on the screen. 

But I suggested that if you start now, you will have XML under
your belt when it does take over in 2 years....

> So claiming that HTML is obsolete at this point is
> rather presumptuous and IMHO it's also inconsiderate.

I don't believe it!  You took that personally ??!!??!   
Inconsiderate didn't enter into my thinking.  I have some more
personal attacks to throw your way....  Remember that old 386
you purchased 15 years ago?  JUNK!  Remember 8 track
cassets?  Dynosaurs!   


> >Why is it some people cling to hand-building presentation web
> >pages by using html?  Is this some kind of security blanket that
> >makes them feel all technical and smart.
>
> Has it not occured to you that *some* people *prefer* it?
> For instance, every HTML editor I ever tried had an annoying
> habbit of always second-guessing me and often not even allowing
> me to correct those second-guessings.

I've never seen even one of these that did not allow you to 
hand fix stuff, and at least a familarity with the basic rules is still
usefull for these rare hand corrections.

But that is a reason to be working on BETTER GUI TOOLS not
reverting to obsolete methods.  What would happen if we took
that approach to software in general?  I'd be writing this with a quill
pen on parchment.

 
> One thing I must say is this: if such a WYSIWYG editor
> is to be written (or if such an editor *has* been written)
> the programmer who *wrote* the editor *would* have to
> be one of us-guys who *do* know how to code HTML. Yes,
> he/she would *have* to be a member of this category that
> you just flamed.

But I didn't just flame anyone, except those who insist hand-job-html
is the only way to go (and there are many who feel this way).

And, yes, the guy who wrote the printer drivers for HP laser jets
was a wiz at hpcl.  And we were lucky to have him around.

Now why was it again that you don't encode your printed works
in hpcl????  You know those cranky WYSIWYG word processors
often mess up and second guess,  and don't allow you to fix it....

(tounge wedged firmly in cheek here.....)

-- 
_____________________________________
John Andersen