Re: Inexpensive WYSIWYG HTML editor?



Todd:

Bob Harris is right...in the "inexpensive" category, FREE is hard to
beat. I can tell you from personal experience that the hands-down
winners in that category are the two editors that Bob listed:

http://www.mozilla.org/products/mozilla1.x/

http://www.nvu.com/download.html

That is not to take away anything from Taco, but I have no direct
experience with that editor. According to the VersionTracker reviews,
Taco has some issues with CSS, but since you explicitly specified an
HTML editor, perhaps that's not relevant to your requirements.

Note that the head developer of Nvu -- Daniel Glazman -- was also a
principal driving force behind Mozilla's Composer. Because Mozilla has
abandoned further development of the Mozilla Suite, further development
of the Composer is frozen. Hence, Nvu is now the repository of that
development path going forward. It does have some nice features that,
sadly, most likely will never appear in Composer.

Nevertheless, they are both excellent editors. Both will produce
standards-compliant code, both will let you edit your source code as
text, in graphical format, or in HTML tags format -- and let you
preview the results -- both support CSS, and both give you menu access
to code validation.

A point of semantic clarification: I'm not entirely sure what you mean
by "WYSIWYG". Both Nvu and Mozilla Composer allow you to preview your
pages exactly as they will look in a standards-compliant browser (any
of the Mozilla browsers qualify), but you should be aware that all
browsers are NOT fully standards-compliant. Safari is pretty good, and
so is Opera. OmniWeb has a few quirks, but is mostly well-behaved.

Unfortunately, Microsoft Internet Explorer is another story. You can
write pages whose code validates perfectly, yet when you view them in
MSIE, content is badly out of alignment, horizontal lines display as
bordered solid objects, and various other aspects of your pages are out
of whack. In other words, what you see when you view validated code in
a properly designed browser is NOT what you get in Internet Explorer.
Then you're in for a mess of wasted time figuring out how to get your
pages to display properly in MSIE without breaking your code's
validation. Microsoft Internet Explorer is a bloody nightmare.

.



Relevant Pages

  • OT: question about HTTP headers
    ... I also tried installing the Win32 Mozilla in WINE, ... WINE and the site would actually believe that it was a Win32-base browser. ... I used wget to download the two .asp scripts that run when you first bring up the page, but I could not find in the browser identification code where this particular information was pulled from. ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: Mozilla Firefox
    ... I tried it and quickly realised it is the best browser around. ... > isn't as feature rich as Mozilla, ... Like I said, I don't like Firefox, I just use it ... - The vulnerability has been confirmed in Mozilla 1.7.3 and Mozilla ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.inetexplorer.ie6.browser)
  • Re: Newsgroup
    ... > Netscape browser and bypassing the installed adware. ... slings and arrows of all monocultures: a vigorous attack by pathogens. ... Mozilla, Firefox, Safari, etc.) share a common phylogenetic history. ... species diversity in a neotropical forest." ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Browsers browsers
    ... justify priority selection for MSFT. ... will be a product written by any software company that everyone will like ... W3C standards are not products of the Mozilla Organization. ... but the Netscape browser was. ...
    (microsoft.public.scripting.jscript)
  • Re: Intelligent publish-to-website utility/script?
    ... seems to ftp each component file up each time I make some ... Q. Is Nvu starting from scratch or from existing code? ... Nvu was started from the Mozilla Composer code base. ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)