OK, I should clarify: Does anyone have any recommendations for visual/wysiwyg html editors? I'm considering OpenOffice, but at present it seems to be confused by the pre-existing pages and also generates some bad pages that only it can display. Yes, _I_ use vi, but I need this for someone who is not tecchie, and doesn't want to become so. So vi, emacs, or anything that uses the html itself as the primary means of display is not an option. So, quanta--now that I've compiled it--isn't an option either. It has to be visual/wysiwyg, otherwise I'll be maintaining this site forever more (which isn't the end of the world, but we'd both prefer some level of independence :) Sorry I wasn't clear in the first place :) Any suggestions? Cheers, Simon "You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions." Naguib Mahfouz __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
On Tuesday 07 February 2006 15:58, Simon Roberts wrote:
OK, I should clarify: Does anyone have any recommendations for visual/wysiwyg html editors? I'm considering OpenOffice, but at present it seems to be confused by the pre-existing pages and also generates some bad pages that only it can display.
Yes, _I_ use vi, but I need this for someone who is not tecchie, and doesn't want to become so. So vi, emacs, or anything that uses the html itself as the primary means of display is not an option. So, quanta--now that I've compiled it--isn't an option either. It has to be visual/wysiwyg, otherwise I'll be maintaining this site forever more (which isn't the end of the world, but we'd both prefer some level of independence :)
Sorry I wasn't clear in the first place :)
Any suggestions?
www.nvu.org
Simon Roberts wrote:
OK, I should clarify: Does anyone have any recommendations for visual/wysiwyg html editors? I'm considering OpenOffice, but at present it seems to be confused by the pre-existing pages and also generates some bad pages that only it can display.
Yes, _I_ use vi, but I need this for someone who is not tecchie, and doesn't want to become so. So vi, emacs, or anything that uses the html itself as the primary means of display is not an option. So, quanta--now that I've compiled it--isn't an option either. It has to be visual/wysiwyg, otherwise I'll be maintaining this site forever more (which isn't the end of the world, but we'd both prefer some level of independence :)
Sorry I wasn't clear in the first place :)
Any suggestions?
Cheers, Simon
I haven't used it in a while, but NVu was really coming along nicely. Jim
I use Dreamweaver running under vmware on SUSE-10. I think Dreamweaver has it
all over every other editor html system out there. Not only for ease of
manipulating the webpages but for keeping track of my site uploading/syncing all
the pages and telling me when there are problems.
Quoting Simon Roberts
OK, I should clarify: Does anyone have any recommendations for visual/wysiwyg html editors? I'm considering OpenOffice, but at present it seems to be confused by the pre-existing pages and also generates some bad pages that only it can display.
Yes, _I_ use vi, but I need this for someone who is not tecchie, and doesn't want to become so. So vi, emacs, or anything that uses the html itself as the primary means of display is not an option. So, quanta--now that I've compiled it--isn't an option either. It has to be visual/wysiwyg, otherwise I'll be maintaining this site forever more (which isn't the end of the world, but we'd both prefer some level of independence :)
Sorry I wasn't clear in the first place :)
Any suggestions?
Cheers, Simon
"You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions." Naguib Mahfouz
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
Simon,
As others have indicated, Nvu is probably your best
bet. It is based on the old Netscape/Mozilla Composer
code, prettified by the Linspire (Lindows) folks.
There's a Windows version, too.
I wouldn't rule out Quanta, though. I have a feeling
you got an old tarball version. Quanta Plus has been
part of the KDE Webdev package since KDE 3.3, and the
newer versions come with the Visual Page Layout
WYSIWIG editor. The user can choose to display VPL,
the source editor, or both.
Mike McCallister
Author, "SUSE Linux 10 Unleashed"
--- Simon Roberts
OK, I should clarify: Does anyone have any recommendations for visual/wysiwyg html editors? I'm considering OpenOffice, but at present it seems to be confused by the pre-existing pages and also generates some bad pages that only it can display.
Yes, _I_ use vi, but I need this for someone who is not tecchie, and doesn't want to become so. So vi, emacs, or anything that uses the html itself as the primary means of display is not an option. So, quanta--now that I've compiled it--isn't an option either. It has to be visual/wysiwyg, otherwise I'll be maintaining this site forever more (which isn't the end of the world, but we'd both prefer some level of independence :)
Sorry I wasn't clear in the first place :)
Any suggestions?
Cheers, Simon
"You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions." Naguib Mahfouz
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
--- Mike McCallister
As others have indicated, Nvu is probably your best bet. It is based on the old Netscape/Mozilla Composer code, prettified by the Linspire (Lindows) folks. There's a Windows version, too.
I wouldn't rule out Quanta, though. I have a feeling you got an old tarball version. Quanta Plus has been part of the KDE Webdev package since KDE 3.3, and the newer versions come with the Visual Page Layout WYSIWIG editor. The user can choose to display VPL, the source editor, or both.
Ah, now I feel stupid. I missed that totally about quanta, so I'll go have another try. NVu seems to have a website that's trying to sell me stuff, or get me laid... I don't think I understand quite what's going on there, but now you point me in the right direction with quanta, I'll play with that for a while, and maybe try NVu if I can work out what their website is doing. Many thanks to all who offered suggestions, and again sorry for the confusion. Cheers, Simon "You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions." Naguib Mahfouz __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
... NVu seems to have a website that's trying to sell me stuff, or get me laid...
Aha, as a later poster pointed out: nvu.com, not nvu.org :) Thanks all! Cheers, Simon "You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions." Naguib Mahfouz __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
--- Dave Howorth
Simon Roberts wrote:
Aha, as a later poster pointed out: nvu.com, not nvu.org :)
FWIW, both nvu and quanta (in package kdewebdev3) are already in YaST.
I think the appropriate response from me right now is, well: "Doh!" "You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions." Naguib Mahfouz __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
On 2/7/06, Simon Roberts
Ah, now I feel stupid. I missed that totally about quanta, so I'll go have another try. NVu seems to have a website that's trying to sell me stuff, or get me laid... I don't think I understand quite what's going on there, but now you point me in the right direction with quanta, I'll play with that for a while, and maybe try NVu if I can work out what their website is doing.
I think the correct location is: http://www.linspire.com/lindows_products_details.php?product_id=12173 or http://www.nvu.com/index.html I'll bet you went to nvu.org, probably? Peter
On Tuesday 07 February 2006 19:51, Peter Van Lone wrote:
or
I'll bet you went to nvu.org, probably?
My bad.... I gave him the nvu.org without checking on it first.
On Tuesday 07 February 2006 19:38, Simon Roberts wrote:
Ah, now I feel stupid. I missed that totally about quanta, so I'll go have another try. NVu seems to have a website that's trying to sell me stuff, or get me laid... I don't think I understand quite what's going on there, but now you point me in the right direction with quanta, I'll play with that for a while, and maybe try NVu if I can work out what their website is doing.
Make sure that is: www.nvu.com I see no hard sell at the above site.
On Tuesday 07 February 2006 20:58, Simon Roberts wrote:
OK, I should clarify: Does anyone have any recommendations for visual/wysiwyg html editors? I'm considering OpenOffice, but at present it seems to be confused by the pre-existing pages and also generates some bad pages that only it can display.
Yes, _I_ use vi, but I need this for someone who is not tecchie, and doesn't want to become so. So vi, emacs, or anything that uses the html itself as the primary means of display is not an option. So, quanta--now that I've compiled it--isn't an option either. It has to be visual/wysiwyg, otherwise I'll be maintaining this site forever more (which isn't the end of the world, but we'd both prefer some level of independence :)
Sorry I wasn't clear in the first place :)
Any suggestions?
Cheers, Simon
"You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions." Naguib Mahfouz
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Quanta it does WYSIWYG ... -- The Labour party has changed there emblem from a rose to a condom as it more accuratley reflects the governments political stance. A condom allows for inflation halts production destroys the next gereration, protects a bunch of pricks, and givesyou a sense of security while you are actually bieng fucked from GSM
On Tuesday 07 February 2006 17:32, Peter Nikolic wrote:
Quanta it does WYSIWYG ...
I've recommended these in the past, but I haven't evaluated them in a long time: Mozilla Composer Nvu Amaya (from W3C) Adobe GoLive Does Navigator still come with a composer? - Carl
On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 12:16 +0100, T. Ribbrock wrote:
On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 10:32:26PM +0000, Peter Nikolic wrote:
Quanta it does WYSIWYG ...
There is no such thing as WYSIWYG in HTML...
Oh! There most certainly is in the editor which is what this thread is all about, a graphical editor for HTML that supports WYSIWYG. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 11:11:03AM -0500, Ken Schneider wrote:
On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 12:16 +0100, T. Ribbrock wrote:
On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 10:32:26PM +0000, Peter Nikolic wrote:
Quanta it does WYSIWYG ...
There is no such thing as WYSIWYG in HTML...
Oh! There most certainly is in the editor which is what this thread is all about, a graphical editor for HTML that supports WYSIWYG.
No. Per definition, there cannot be such a thing as WYSIWYG for HTML. The are some GUI programs that make creating a HTML page easier, but that has nothing to do with WYSIWYG. The problem is that you have hardly any control over the displaying side: You do not know what fonts are installed, you do not know the size of the screen, you do not know how many colours the screen supports, the device can be a mobile, a PDA, a text browser, a braille-converter, a graphical browser and so on and so on. That's nowhere near to "WYSIWYG". The only possible interpretation of WYSIWYG in this context is "what you see is what YOU get - and you can make some guesses as to what everybody else might see". Everybody using such tools should be aware of this distinction, IMO, and use the tools accordingly. Cheerio, Thomas
On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 17:24 +0100, T. Ribbrock wrote:
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 11:11:03AM -0500, Ken Schneider wrote:
On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 12:16 +0100, T. Ribbrock wrote:
On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 10:32:26PM +0000, Peter Nikolic wrote:
Quanta it does WYSIWYG ...
There is no such thing as WYSIWYG in HTML...
Oh! There most certainly is in the editor which is what this thread is all about, a graphical editor for HTML that supports WYSIWYG.
No. Per definition, there cannot be such a thing as WYSIWYG for HTML. The are some GUI programs that make creating a HTML page easier, but that has nothing to do with WYSIWYG. The problem is that you have hardly any control over the displaying side: You do not know what fonts are installed, you do not know the size of the screen, you do not know how many colours the screen supports, the device can be a mobile, a PDA, a text browser, a braille-converter, a graphical browser and so on and so on. That's nowhere near to "WYSIWYG". The only possible interpretation of WYSIWYG in this context is "what you see is what YOU get - and you can make some guesses as to what everybody else might see". Everybody using such tools should be aware of this distinction, IMO, and use the tools accordingly.
Cheez.... It's the same thing whether you write HTML code in vi or use a graphical editor. You can only present what -you- think most people will be able to see. In the context of this thread (Nvu, OO, Quanta take your pick) -IS- a WYSIWYG editor as it displays what the authors intent is to the author. Get a f$%king life. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998
On Thursday 09 February 2006 17:09, Ken Schneider wrote:
On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 17:24 +0100, T. Ribbrock wrote:
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 11:11:03AM -0500, Ken Schneider wrote:
On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 12:16 +0100, T. Ribbrock wrote:
On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 10:32:26PM +0000, Peter Nikolic wrote:
Quanta it does WYSIWYG ... /snip It's the same thing whether you write HTML code in vi or use a graphical editor. You can only present what -you- think most people will be able to see. In the context of this thread (Nvu, OO, Quanta take your pick) -IS- a WYSIWYG editor as it displays what the authors intent is to the author.
Get a f$%king life.
-- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998
exactly my thoughts.. pete . -- The Labour party has changed there emblem from a rose to a condom as it more accuratley reflects the governments political stance. A condom allows for inflation halts production destroys the next gereration, protects a bunch of pricks, and givesyou a sense of security while you are actually bieng fucked from GSM
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 12:09:28PM -0500, Ken Schneider wrote:
On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 17:24 +0100, T. Ribbrock wrote:
No. Per definition, there cannot be such a thing as WYSIWYG for HTML. The are some GUI programs that make creating a HTML page easier, but that has nothing to do with WYSIWYG. The problem is that you have hardly any control over the displaying side: You do not know what fonts are installed, you do not know the size of the screen, you do not know how many colours the screen supports, the device can be a mobile, a PDA, a text browser, a braille-converter, a graphical browser and so on and so on. That's nowhere near to "WYSIWYG". The only possible interpretation of WYSIWYG in this context is "what you see is what YOU get - and you can make some guesses as to what everybody else might see". Everybody using such tools should be aware of this distinction, IMO, and use the tools accordingly.
Cheez....
It's the same thing whether you write HTML code in vi or use a graphical editor. You can only present what -you- think most people will be able to see. In the context of this thread (Nvu, OO, Quanta take your pick) -IS- a WYSIWYG editor as it displays what the authors intent is to the author.
Of course the problem is the same - that's the issue at hand. However, if the graphical tools are dubbed "WYSIWYG", many people *will* expect that that's exactly what happens. For example. they will happily use local fonts - which will or will not result in readable pages elsewhere. That's not WYSIWYG and it should not be named such, as otherwise wrong expectations are created. What's so difficult to understand about this? Regards, Thomas
Thomas, On Tuesday 21 February 2006 01:48, T. Ribbrock wrote:
...
Of course the problem is the same - that's the issue at hand. However, if the graphical tools are dubbed "WYSIWYG", many people *will* expect that that's exactly what happens. For example. they will happily use local fonts - which will or will not result in readable pages elsewhere. That's not WYSIWYG and it should not be named such, as otherwise wrong expectations are created. What's so difficult to understand about this?
Well, people who are that clueless about the nature of HTML and Web publishing are going to get an education pretty soon, anyway. They'll either adapt or walk away, I suppose. And it definitely is WYSIWYG, it's just not WYSIWTG (... They Get). As one person pointed out in something I read several years ago, WYSIWYG should really be called WYSIAYG (... All You Get). WYSIWYG seemed pretty cool when GUI-based personal computers came to electronic publishing (before which it was stuff like the roff family of processors and other varieties of overt mark-up), but it's an impoverished model for real publishing, suitable only for small-scale works and one-off tasks.
Regards,
Thomas
Randall Schulz
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 06:10:19AM -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:
Well, people who are that clueless about the nature of HTML and Web publishing are going to get an education pretty soon, anyway. They'll either adapt or walk away, I suppose.
Hear, hear. I just hope you're right... :-)
And it definitely is WYSIWYG, it's just not WYSIWTG (... They Get). As one person pointed out in something I read several years ago, WYSIWYG should really be called WYSIAYG (... All You Get). WYSIWYG seemed pretty cool when GUI-based personal computers came to electronic publishing (before which it was stuff like the roff family of processors and other varieties of overt mark-up), but it's an impoverished model for real publishing, suitable only for small-scale works and one-off tasks.
I reckon that's one of the reasons why LaTeX is still pretty much alive, fortunately. BTW: Wasn't it LaTeX -> LyX that came up with "WYSIWYM" (... You Mean) - I always loved that approach. Regards, Thomas
On 2/21/06, T. Ribbrock
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 06:10:19AM -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:
Well, people who are that clueless about the nature of HTML and Web publishing are going to get an education pretty soon, anyway. They'll either adapt or walk away, I suppose.
Hear, hear. I just hope you're right... :-)
And it definitely is WYSIWYG, it's just not WYSIWTG (... They Get). As one person pointed out in something I read several years ago, WYSIWYG should really be called WYSIAYG (... All You Get). WYSIWYG seemed pretty cool when GUI-based personal computers came to electronic publishing (before which it was stuff like the roff family of processors and other varieties of overt mark-up), but it's an impoverished model for real publishing, suitable only for small-scale works and one-off tasks.
I reckon that's one of the reasons why LaTeX is still pretty much alive, fortunately. BTW: Wasn't it LaTeX -> LyX that came up with "WYSIWYM" (... You Mean)
That's what Dennis M. Ritchie said about troff, but which is also true for (La)TeX. \Steve
Thomas, On Tuesday 21 February 2006 06:39, T. Ribbrock wrote:
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 06:10:19AM -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:
...
And it definitely is WYSIWYG, it's just not WYSIWTG (... They Get). As one person pointed out in something I read several years ago, WYSIWYG should really be called WYSIAYG (... All You Get). WYSIWYG seemed pretty cool when GUI-based personal computers came to electronic publishing (before which it was stuff like the roff family of processors and other varieties of overt mark-up), but it's an impoverished model for real publishing, suitable only for small-scale works and one-off tasks.
I reckon that's one of the reasons why LaTeX is still pretty much alive, fortunately. BTW: Wasn't it LaTeX -> LyX that came up with "WYSIWYM" (... You Mean) - I always loved that approach.
TeX and its various macro packages and support tools is _very_ much alive! Academic publishing would be paralyzed without it and they'd simply have to reinvent it were it to somehow disappear. TeX's handling of formulas is superb (probably unsurpassed in any other document preparation software), and highly valued by researchers in scientific and mathematic disciplines.
Regards,
Thomas
Randall Schulz
participants (13)
-
Bruce Marshall -
Carl Hartung -
Dave Howorth -
Jim Sabatke -
Ken Schneider -
Mike McCallister -
Peter Nikolic -
Peter Van Lone -
Randall R Schulz -
ronw＠paradise.net.nz -
Simon Roberts -
Steve Graegert -
T. Ribbrock