Re: New Topic WYSIWYG

At 06:05 p.m. 12/05/98 -0600, Virginia Blalock wrote:
>And no, this is not a "bash WYSIWYG" thing.

Yet. :)

>I have always wondered why the programmers of these editors make the
>editors come out with crappy code. I would imagine that they know that some
>of the code the editor generates is non HTML compliant. 

You could likewise ask "why do most web designers make non-
compliant pages?"  The truth is that by being part of the HTML
Writers Guild and other similarly focused groups, you are not a
normal web author -- you are exposed to concepts such as "valid
HTML" that most web creators rarely hear of.

>I would think that WYSIWYG editors would be more useful if they did the job
>they do and generate conpliant code. 

Many of them were written at a time in which validity was not an
issue, and when "Does it work on Netscape or Microsoft?" was a
larger factor than "Does it validate?". 

That said, many of them _are_ becoming better at creating valid
HTML; Hot Metal Pro 4.0 (and higher), for example, are very good
at producing valid HTML.


--
Kynn Bartlett  <kynn(at)idyllmtn.com>             http://www.idyllmtn.com/~kynn/
Chief Technologist & Co-Owner, Idyll Mountain Internet; Fullerton, California
Enroll now for web accessibility with HTML 4.0!   http://www.hwg.org/classes/
The voice of the future?   http://www.hwg.org/opcenter/w3c/voicebrowsers.html

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