JTK wrote:
>
> Blake Ross wrote:
> >
> > JTK wrote:
> >
>
> [snip]
>
> > >>Because (a) it's not hard to plop down a standard Windows rich textbox
> > >>control and start extending it (many of those text editors you mention
> > >>are just frameworks around a standard Windows control, with some added
> > >>functionality,
> > >>
> > >
> > >So why doesn't Mozilla' news/mail reader do that? "Because we need it
> > >to be HTML." No you don't, you need it to be able to edit text.
> > >"Because it's not cross platform.":
> > >
> > >#ifdef WINDOWS
> > >// Use perfectly good system-supplied text edit control and hit 99.44%
> > >of the market
> > >#elif MAC
> > >// Use whatever the Mac has as for a text edit control
> > >#else
> > >// Use flakey reinvented wheel for the remaining 0.000001%
> > >#endif
> > >
> > Well, it's in XUL for one,
>
> THE ACTUAL ***LOGIC*** OF MOZILLA'S EDIT CONTROL IS IMPLEMENTED IN
> ***XUL****!??!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!
>
> Holy Christ, good night Irene.
>
> > but anyways...we'd still have to do all kinds
> > of weird sub classing to be able to do proper command handling, etc.,
> > and I just don't see the point of it.
>
> The point is that you'd have a usable email editor.
>
> > Since Composer would continue to
> > usea homegrown editor widget anyways (as I'm sure FrontPage does), I'd
> > just as soon rather see the kinks in the widget worked out. Frankly, I
> > use mail compose on a daily basis, and I hardly ever run into problems
> > when composing...it's just that one or two bugs are especially annoying
> > when you run into them, and thus get blown out of proportion.
> >
>
> Oh, well, if all Mozilla's email editor has is one or two bugs... come
> on Blake.
>
> > Also, your first reason is incorrect, of course html compose needs to
> > support html ...
>
> Yep, just as soon as non-HTML compose is working.
>
> > as for plain text compose, well, that uses the normal
> > (core) editor widget as far as I know (i.e that used for textfields in
> > pages...if it doesn't, it probably should), and I never have problems
> > with that.
> >
>
> I do. Peter seems to.
>
> > >
> > >I can't think of a single one that has problems editing simple ASCII
> > >text.
> > >
> > See above; html compose does much more.
>
> And yet it can't edit simple no-frills text.
>
> > Anyways, you're right, I hardly
> > ever do either, but that's all I can say since I honestly don't often
> > run into problems with mail compose (when I do, it's with the quoting
> > mechanism). This isn't some "mozilla rulz!" blind statement, I'll be
> > the first to admit that editor never used to do what I want, but it's
> > much improved now.
>
> Granted, but it's still miles from even the NC4.7x days.
>
> > I have, however, run into plenty of annoying
> > problems using Outlook Express's html mail compose (which I used to
> > use),
>
> I thought Mozilla was supposed to be better than Microsoft's offerings,
> not worse.
>
> > and plenty of problems laying things out using some of editor's
> > advanced features -- i.e. tables -- in FrontPage.
> >
>
> Which brings up a good point: Why does Mozilla include an HTML editor
> at all? Nobody used it in NC4.x and nobody's going to use it in
> Mozilla. Ship it as a separate product.
>
> > --Blake
Ahmm! I use it ocassionally. Netscape has always had html editor since
Composer was added to Netscape Navigator 3.0.4. Gold (Which paid I paid
for at the time about 40 bucks.).
There is even a couple of newsgroups one of which is on Netscape Server
that uses HTML exclusively.
(netscape.test.multimedia)
(Liveupdate/authoring.mailandnews)
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET |MEMBER:VPEA (LIFE) ETA-I, NESDA,ISCET, Sterling
616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:540-632-5045, FAX:540-632-0868
Martinsville Va 24112-1809|[EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
