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.
Subject:Re: YOUR FAVORIATE HTML EDITOR From:David Blyth <dblyth -at- QUALCOMM -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 3 Apr 1996 13:26:44 -0700
Here are my responses without looking at anyone else's:
>For a while there was the debate over HTML versus Adobe Acrobat. For those
>of us who heartily agree that HTML is the open road to online documents,
>what editor do you use or would recommend?
I do not currently use any HTML editor. Nor do I use any XXX --> HTML
translators. I write HTML direct with a text editor. There are a lot
of interesting tricks you can do this way that aren't built into any
HTML editor - plus you end up knowing HTML Real Well.
If I'm feeling lazy, I'll go into Word6 and use keyboard short cuts
and a mouse to move HTML code around direct. No translators. No
"save as HTML". I really do read and write HTML direct.
>Adobe Page Mill, HotMetal, HTML Assistant, HTML Transit....any
>comments on these?
Adobe Page Mill is real good for something quick and dirty, but won't
let you see the HTML code (!). I'm evaluating Internet Assistant now.
My first impression is that it's OK for simple stuff - which is all
I want it to do for now.
The best Frame --> HTML translator is probably WebMaker, because it
does _not_ associate 1 Frame tag with 1 HTML tag.
IMHO, all current HTML translators and editors have at least 2 problems
(William Horton also has some comments on the topic):
o It's difficult-to-impossible to translate from something content
rich (RTF) to something brain dead. Editors have a similar
problem, because they give the _appearance_ that something has
been accomplished while still being brain dead.
You can do more with HTML when you hand-tweak it. HTML 3.0
gets close to being alive. Now if only people would use it...
o Translators and Editors don't provide the set of tools necessary
to write Web pages.
A document is not what's written, it's what's _read_. A Web page
is not the written HTML, it's what's _displayed_ via a browser. That
includes anything you can do with Java, Perl, Shockwave and so forth.
I, of course, want to be a Web writer - and understand it all. (Selah).
David (The Man) Blyth
Technical Writer & Web Site Designer
The usual disclaimers apply - I don't speak for QUALCOMM, they don't speak