On Thursday 04 December 2003 11:29, Anthony Anson wrote:
I wouldn't dream of advocating something 'because it is good for you', having memories of being at boarding school and being dosed with all sorts of medicines and supplements ('iron' springs to mind) because I was ailing fast, and no-one recognised lead poisoning....
As has been said earlier, WYSIWYG is NWYSIWYG: quite the reverse, and tends to bork anything except in the browser it was intended to be viewed in. (No prizes awarded for correct identification of respective elements.)
Fine for professionals, which seems to cover many of the people in this group. But if Joe is an ordinary guy at home wanting to put up a family website on FreeServe, why on earth would he care if the result runs on Lynx or whatever? He knows that 99% of viewers will be running IE and won't give a toss for the rest. He doesn't do it for the love of it; he has no concept of what makes tidy HTML but wants results NOW and preferably at little or no cost.
I do the occasional set of web pages, mainly simple stuff. I prefer RAD tools for getting me started but I'm quite happy to tweak it manually from there on in. I use Symantec's Visual Page, now long abandoned by its maker. Produces clean HTML that I've seen no browser object to and has the usual manual editing option. I'd like the same kind of thing on Linux but haven't seen it yet. Like Joe, I have better things to do than type all those tags if I can get a program to do it for me, and if the results are occasionally not what I expected, that's life.
P.S. My car is an automatic, I own a dishwasher and my TV/Video/CD all have remote controls.
-- GT