Re: XHTML

Excellent point, John.  I much prefer customizable editors to one's that are
hard-coded to a spec.  I like Editplus because of this, and we have also
modified a copy of Dreamweaver so that it has moved toward XHTML complicancy
in such areas as closing empty elements. using strong and em, and adding
table summaries to the insert dialogue box.

I guess the key in this environment is to remain flexible....stop growing,
and you get left behind.

D

----- Original Message -----
From: John Allred <webmaster(at)mscounties.com>
To: Darrell King <darrell(at)webctr.com>; <hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 8:20 PM
Subject: Re: XHTML


I think this might be a slight overstatement. Even now, most WYSIWYG
editors (or non-WYSIWYG editors, for that matter) are way behind. It's
not uncommon to find them providing internal validation to the 3.2 spec,
even though 4.0 has been out for over two years now. How long will it
take them to support 4.01? And how many will support XHTML at all? I
just don't see it.

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA