MTeF> "jon hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
MTeF> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Yeah, that's the best part about it...but the script API is even less
>> documented, and less powerful (can't call COM objects) than
>> Homesite's.
MTeF> I strongly disagree with this. Both about the documentation and the power
MTeF> :-)
Oh really... :)
How exactly does an extremely small subset of DOM 1 that is
implemented unevenly across the different objects qualify as
powerful? To say nothing of DOM 2 or 3.
How does the fact that all the menus are very nicely defined in XML
files, but no one has thought to distribute DTD's of any kind qualify
as well documented?
How can DW's data connectivity compare in any regard to ADO for power?
DW allows only JS or C, HS allows any language built on WSH, meaning
VBS, JS, Kix, etc., and any language a COM object can be written in.
Why the heck is DWFile so slow?
I also can't speak to the C API, knowing very little C, but how many web
developers know C?
The only thing going for DW is the UI extensibility, which is awesome,
the only other closed source IDE with that ability that I know of is
VS, but it's stuck with a less than Netscape 4 level DOM, and limited
the HTML to define the look and feel, with doc.write the only way to
make content dynamic. I can't help but feel that the whole DW
extensibility thing has not enough resources, meaning people working
on it, or it has too many, and not enough organization. Maybe it's
because it has to run on the Mac as well that is holding it back.
I think Mozilla is the model of what DW extensibility model want's to be.
XUL/XBL/XPCOM kicks butt...or even HTML/DOM2/XML Events. Whatever the
solution is, DW needs it. It's really lagging.
--
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
