RE: CuteHTML, any good?
by "James B. (Jim) Lingan" <jblingan(at)flash.net>
|
Date: |
Sun, 29 Aug 1999 22:22:09 -0500 |
To: |
"HTML Writer's Guild -- Basics" <hwg-basics(at)hwg.org>, <tristar(at)raex.com> |
In-Reply-To: |
raex |
|
todo: View
Thread,
Original
|
|
I've been extremely fond of both CuteFTP and CuteHTML
James B. (Jim) Lingan
DeBello-Lingan Internet Services
jblingan(at)debello-lingan.houston.tx.us
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hwg-basics(at)hwg.org [mailto:owner-hwg-basics(at)hwg.org]On
Behalf Of Todd Eddy
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 1999 2:33
To: HTML Writer's Guild -- Basics
Subject: CuteHTML, any good?
I just noticed that the people that made CuteFTP have made CuteHTML, a
free html editor. I was wondering if anyone has tried this out and if
it is any better then Archnophilia. the address to go for more info is
http://www.cuteftp.com/products/cutehtml/cutehtml.html
plase send a CC: of any replies to tristar(at)raex.com, thank you
--
Todd Eddy
tristar(at)raex.com
http://welcome.to/tristar/
Get your photos scanned for free, go to
http://web.raex.com/~tristar/scanning.html for more info.
HTML: hwg-basics mailing list archives,
maintained by Webmasters @ IWA