-66

I'm very much in favor of this idea. The Quanta developers don't seem interested in WYSIWYG but it is actually very important for people who aren't very comfortable with code and also for basic editing.

Use case: I'm part of the Web site committee for my church. We use Adobe Dreamweaver. This program has a very very good IDE for working with the code, which I use for more complex projects, but it also has a good WYSIWG interface, which the other members use more often than the code-based interface and I use for very quick editing.

We're using plain HTML pages and CSS, managed through Dreamweaver's template system. I would like a good WYSIWYG HTML editor for KDE, cutting down on the times I have to boot into Windows just for quick editing of a single page.

I think this would be better in kdesdk rather than koffice.

bluebayou wrote:WYSIWYG's may not be as "good" at producing code, but I never had a problem with Frontpage.

The thing is, in addition to allowing simple point-and-click editing of HTML documents, Frontpage deeply integrates many "advanced" features which are actually features that belong in a content management system (e.g. features for managing multi-page sites and "automatically" integrating those pages with each other). And if I understand the original post correctly, these are the kind of features you're looking for, right?

What Frontpage does is, it adds fragments of its own custom, proprietary content management system to your site "behind the scenes" when you use such features. The typical Microsoft-y, inflexible, "hackish", vendor-lock-in approach so to speak.

I doubt any KDE developers will be motivated to maintain such a custom pseudo-content-management-system beast of their own just to have a Frontpage clone for KDE - seeing as there already are enough existing, real, clean, well-supported CMS's out there.

Angel Blue01 wrote:I'm very much in favor of this idea. The Quanta developers don't seem interested in WYSIWYG but it is actually very important for people who aren't very comfortable with code and also for basic editing.

From reading Milian's blog, I don't get the feeling that the devs are actively trying to keep WYSIWYG out of Quanta by all means - rather it seems they just don't see it as a priority or necessity, and manpower is limited. (Is there even anyone else in addition to Milian on the Quanta team currently?)

So if someone steps up and provides a clean implementation for simple WYSIWYG editing of static pages (e.g. by integrating WebKit editing functionality or something), I don't think they would object.

Note, however, that "simple WYSIWYG editing of static pages" and "doing what Frontpage does" are two very different things...

Angel Blue01 wrote:Use case: I'm part of the Web site committee for my church. We use Adobe Dreamweaver. This program has a very very good IDE for working with the code, which I use for more complex projects, but it also has a good WYSIWG interface, which the other members use more often than the code-based interface and I use for very quick editing.

I don't know what kind of content your church website needs exactly, but if it's the typical small-to-medium-sized-non-profit-organisation-website stuff (news, events, groups, ...) then this is exactly the kind of thing that web CMS's were invented for (and yes, most of them do provide WYSIWYG for page editing)... Try one!

I agre with most of the people that say that something like microsoft frontpage is bad.

But if we could have a simplified mode in quanta, with a dialog helping you creating a new html document setting the right things in the header, and a preview mode where you can type text and apply most used tags using a toolbar, it's would be good for most people.

Even a set of cool page templates would be nice, since most new people will be happy with those templates.

+1 to gerlos. I think page templates is a good way to go to help people get started.

I think it is a pity, that one of KDE's flagships, Quanta, has been droped out by the developpers. Unsless in forums, there is no more mentioning on any list of KDE programs.

The only item which is really missing is a possibility to attach a CSS-command to a chosen text sequence from a drop-down list with the commands in the external CSS file. The usual 15 commands are easy to keep in mind, but the less frequently used ones are easier to find in a such a window, select it and then the command would be integrated into the HTML.

With that done, Quanta can run from my point of view without any further development for the next 10 years. Except the necessary upgrading for CSS3 and HTML 5.

I use WYSIWYG for positioning elements on a template page and will then work the code proper by hand with an editor. (Yes, mostly with the Editor in Quanta.)

The problem with novice web editors is how jumbled the code becomes. It can reek havoc if you're trying to diagnose a problem later.

You should really just get some basic level html and css knowledge before trying design. Knowing what is going on behind the scenes makes designing so much easier. And it becomes very fulfilling when you know what is going behind the scenes.

Just my opinion.

mikesutherland2 wrote:You should really just get some basic level html and css knowledge before trying design. Knowing what is going on behind the scenes makes designing so much easier. And it becomes very fulfilling when you know what is going behind the scenes.

And now that IE6, the source of 75 percent of all web developer's frustrations, is dead[1], it's even more enjoyable.

And CSS3 takes away some of the remaining annoyances...

[1] http://ie6funeral.com/

bluebayou,

Please try BlueGriffon
http://bluegriffon.org/

It's at version 1.1.1 now. We hope version 1.2 will be release soon. We hope that version 1.5 will make it a lot better.

I have tried BlueGriffon version 1.0 under KDE 4.6.5 and it works.

------------

"a word-processor based website maker is a recipe for failure - a terrible website, terrible coding behind it, and will only lead to more problems in the future." - Moult

Agreed. WYSIWYG HTML editors have a tendency to over-use and mis-use <br>,   and <font>. WYSIWYG HTML editors create divitis (over-excessive amount of containers everywhere). WYSIWYG HTML editors create unsemantic markup code. WYSIWYG HTML editors cater for bugs in IE. WYSIWYG HTML editors create bloated code.

More on those problems can be found at
Dan's Web Tips: Cleaning Up After WYSIWYG Editors
http://webtips.dan.info/wysiwyg.html
(although a bit outdated)

------------

People using WYSIWYG HTML editors should at least clean their code with HTML Tidy:

How to use HTML Tidy
http://www.gtalbot.org/linux-section/we ... html-tidy/

regards, Gérard

gerlos wrote:Even a set of cool page templates would be nice, since most new people will be happy with those templates.

Moult wrote:page templates is a good way to go to help people get started.

I recommend people to use KompoZer 0.7.10 ( http://www.kompozer.net/ ) and to wait for BlueGriffon 1.2 ( http://bluegriffon.org/ ).

Regarding CSS templates, here's a list of resources that I recommend:

12 CSS page layouts by css.alsacreations.com
http://fabiwan.kenobi.free.fr/css/PageLayout.html

12 CSS page layouts by css.alsacreations.com
http://fabiwan.kenobi.free.fr/css/PageLayout2.html

CSS Webpage templates
http://www.gtalbot.org/NvuSection/NvuWe ... eTemplates

CSS Layouts at incutio.com
http://css-discuss.incutio.com/wiki/Css_Layouts

KazGarden CSS webpage templates (created by web design artists)
http://www.gimp-werkstatt.de/kaze/
is the result of the efforts of several KompoZer users to create accessible, web standards compliant, valid CSS webpage templates.

WYSIFA Forum for NVU or KompoZer users
http://wysifauthoring.informe.com/forum/
WYSIFA abbreviates "What You See Is Free Authoring"

regards, Gérard Talbot

smls wrote:IE6, the source of 75 percent of all web developer's frustrations, is dead[1]
[1] http://ie6funeral.com/

smls, I do not agree with you.

1-
According to Microsoft itself [2], IE6 users are still (today! September 2nd 2011: 9.7@kb_pc!) very much alive and kicking in China, India, and South Korea.

2-
According to a wide convergence of browser stats from multiple sources [3], about 10@kb_pc of users/visitors on the web still use IE6. 10@kb_pc is still quite a high percentage.

3-
IE6 may be the source of many developer's frustrations but *_IE7 is not a lot better than IE6_*. And I know very well such topic as I have been a beta tester and a very active bug reporter during the whole IE8 beta development cycle.

"Explore" for yourself:

188 bugs in Internet Explorer 7 for Windows
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE7Bugs/
and I stopped adding bug report items with testcases 2-3 years ago. The whole list on that page has probably over 500 bug issues.

[2] Internet Explorer 6 usage around the world (updated every month)
http://www.ie6countdown.com/

[3] Browser stats from multiple sources:
http://www.gtalbot.org/Varia/BrowserSta ... References

regards, Gérard Talbot