- From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2009 18:34:21 +0100
- To: "Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd)" <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
- CC: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>, public-html@w3.org
Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd) 2009-02-15 17.24: > Returning from the digression (to the use of > HTML and RTF for e-mail) to Andrew's deeper > point : > > Andrew Fedoniouk wrote: > >> Having it in place will help to deal with the text in WYSIWYG editors [...] > If you want WYSIWYG editing, then I seriously suggest > that you should not be considering HTML at all, at > least in terms of what you eventually serve to your end- > reader; by all means use HTML and CSS as intermediates, > but then render the resulting code within a constrained > environment and serve the results using a page-description > language such as Adobe PDF. For a person like Andrew, which is in the business of making HTML WYSIWYG editors, this is a fruitless point, I guess. A good WYSIWYG editor may help many to write /more/ structured. And, knowing that you use SeaMoneky: I use Thunderbird, and one reason for doing so is because it lets me use a WYSIWYG HTML editor during writing. Thunderbird will convert this to text when it sends it out, though (depending on the configuration, of course). E.g. it has a useful conversion from WYSIWYG HTML lists to text lists ... And also from STRONG (or bold) to *bold* etc. Regardless of editor: one has to know what one is doing. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Sunday, 15 February 2009 17:35:07 UTC