Re: Renamed: Amaya as browser, not editor

Dr Jacques Steyn wrote:
> 
> But my point was really the following:
> By trying to be both a browser and editor, Amaya has not succeeded yet
> in
> being either.
> 
> 1. There is currently no browser that can understand  HTML 4.0 and CSS
> 2.0
> markup and render it properly. From the W3C recommendations I often get
> some
> or other intention for an element or the like, but proprietory browsers
> seem
> to follow their own noses and release browsers that do not follow the
> W3C's
> intentions (as I read them). So I am looking to Amaya to fulfil this
> role --
> to show how intented markup should be rendered.
> 
> 2. Over the past few years I have used many different kinds of markup
> editors: SGI's WebMagic and CosmoCode, Miscrosoft's Frontpage, and now I
> use
> Macromedia's Dreamweaver. Apart from Dreamweaver all the other packages
> force
> markup in where I do not want it, so I  have grown accustomed to using
> Jot on
> Unix and Notepad on Windows to panelbeat the resulting markup. In fact,
> panelbeating has become such a schlepp that once I knew the elements
> properly
> I preferred using a bland text editor to anything available on the
> market --
I use a text editor and several other editors. 
I want something to test HTML 4.0 and CSS 2.0 markup and render it properly.
I want something to test MATHML markup and render it properly.
That does not exits yet. Amaya does not do this yet.
Even Microsoft word can produce HTML. I need to test then HTML from these
editors. The verification service is the only way I have of testing HTML.
That is a slow process. If Amaya could verify HTML 4.0 that would be a 
big step forward. If Amaya could point to the error that would be a 
big step forward. 
You can open two windows, Amaya and the editor. It is
easy to jump between the browser and the editor. There is little advantage
to having them in the same program.
Jim FitzSimons
Mailto:cherry@neta.com

Received on Friday, 2 October 1998 13:57:21 UTC