TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
>There is one reason to put up with the trouble. A while back I posted a long
>message describing what I see as the long term liabilities of HTML and the WWW
>for us as creators of content. (By long term, I mean 6 months to a year,
>depending on how fast you are populating that Web site.)
>One of the big problems is that HTML is a moving target. It has been through
>three major revisions already and is in the midst of a major fourth. As HTML
>evolves to provide standard mechanisms for very desirable features such as
>tables and document-specific style sheets, and as browsers evolve to support
>those features (as well as their own proprietary ones), we will all face data
>maintenance problems. The more HTML we have, the bigger the data maintenance
>problem we'll face. We will find ourselves trying to upgrade megabytes of HTML
>coded in original HTML 2.0, Netscape HTML, HTML+ and "HTML-My Way." If we want
>to keep our sites fresh, up-to-date and unbroke, we're going to have to revisit
>all these HTML pages (ugh) either by hand (very ugh) or by computer program
>(somewhat less distasteful ugh).
I agree entirely with what Chet is saying. you do not have the physical
presence to be able to keep up with the changes that are currently going on
in the world-of-HTML. If you are running Windoze, I recently found another
HTML editor, acutally it was suggested by another in this list, called Hot
Dog. URL: http://www.sausage.com. I find it puts HoTMetaL to shame. It cn
handle HTML3.0 and goves you the option of saving your file as the version
of HTML you require at the time. Very neat, very functional (as an editor)
worth the $50 US to get the full "pro" copy. HoTMetaL may do the same in
thier "PRO" version, but they don't let you see enough in the "shareware"
version. For "quicky" edits, though, I'd aggree with Matt, in that it canbe
just as faast and easy to use a good text editor (I use the DOS version of
Q-Edit) set it up to your needs/liking and you can do really fast, and not
necessarily dirty, edits.
------=| First Impression Graphics |=------
No One's Life, Liberty or Property is safe while the
Legislature is in session