Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Why do you suppose the author doesn't care about structure/markup? If
> Mozilla's *Web page* editor isn't pro-intent-of-standards and
> pro-structure, what good will it offer over the n+1 editors out there
> that are already built around the assumption that the user wants to
> produce presentational document using the selection-styling editing
> paradigm?
Wysiwyg editing. There is not a single html editor on the market using html
as its internal format and able to do real wysiwyg editing. I want a HTML
editor my father could use to write his book w/o learning the concepts of
HTML, XML or CSS. My goal here is not yet-another-dreamweaver.
> (If someone can recommend a real structural HTML editor for Mac that I
> could recommend to my mother, I am listening. I've been hoping Mozilla
> Editor could be that editor, but, sadly, Editor seems to be headed to
> another direction.)
No, that's exactly our direction. Of course, if your mother is a SGML guru,
she needs something else.
> Previously, it has been argued that Editor should work like a word
> processor.
Is that assertion in my document ?...
> Try this in MS Word:
> 1) Type a block of text.
> 2) Set its style to Heading 1.
> 3) Create a new document with different font settings for Heading 1.
> 4) Copy the block of text (including the paragraph mark!) from the first
> document.
> 5) Paste into the second document.
> 6) Observe how the font settings of the second document get applied.
We all know this case. And we all know that a beginner can't understand why
the character styles are lost. That shows structured editing vs. wysiwyg
editing.
> What I meant with my remark about Word in my previous message was that
> guessing block styles from styling applied to arbitrary selections (the
> Automatically Update Styles feature in Word) leads to trouble. Using the
> style editor explicitly is easier and the results are predictable.
You just forget that you and me are not average users. The style editor
is far too complex for far too many people.
Otherwise, I tend to agree with you.
Kiitos.
</Daniel>
