Lists Home |
Date Index |
One observation I have about the best form of an editor is :
Every single point made to date on the list has within the context of the
position of relevance from which the individual was coming when he/she
expressed it, had something important to add.
So the best editor would be one that would allow all editing options.
Frontpage did this sort-of by making in the same program, a visible
workspaced, which showed only one of three separate ways to edit
at a time. The edit type person ETP just clicked between the different
screens (WYsiWYG-editable page), html-editable page, user functional
browser-non editable page).
When the ETP wanted to change the way the ETP wanted to work the ETP just
selected a different modality to be the current work space visible editor.
(All possible editor types, working simultaneously, updating each ETP
entry in whatever mode, the ETP made the entry to, in all editor types
supported in the whole of the editor.
An ETP can at any point from workspace visible modality switch to the
other and back again[the workspace would only show the
modiality selected]. Basically frontpage made an editor that functioned
in all posibible modes, all of the time, and it did not matter
which mode the ETP was working in, because the editor was doing the same
thing[that is making the edit entry, the same as if the ETP were working
in that particular mode] in all of the other supported modalities at the
same time. This made switching between modalities not only was simple but
also was painless for the ETP.
Maybe a frontpage kind of style; do it all ways all of the time, but
show in the workspace only the ETPs working preference editor
type visible during a particular edit entry.
select a modaility type ( a...z) ; selected modality type C
made one entry, then changed to modality type F, made another entry,
then switched to modiality type z and made yet anotherentry.
switched to browser and viewed the result, selected modality type
A and made yet another edit entryl. and so on.
hope this is not too confusing.
On Sun, 18 Apr 2004, Robert Koberg wrote:
> Which do you think would be more interested in using a WYSIWYG editor,
> the IE user or the mozilla user?
> The thing is contentEditable came out a long time ago in IE and mozilla
> has yet to support it (yes, I know the workarounds). Other things you
> can do in IE but not Mozilla:
> - cache xsl transformers in the browser
> - use MSXML's Schema Object Model (SOM) for client side valdiation
> needs, showing what elements are available at the focus, etc
> That being said, I would love it if mozilla had its own SOM for RNG. The
> SOM is the main thing keeping me with IE.
> One last thing, do you know about the Bitflux editor
> (http://bitflux.org). It is similar and works in mozilla
> p.s. I usually use Safari
> Stephen D. Williams wrote:
> > Just some thoughts on market segment leverage:
> > A number of companies choose to only support IE because they look at the
> > apparent raw user statistics. This may be unwise for many kinds of
> > projects and services.
> > I consider it likely that those people that are Mozilla and other non-IE
> > users are the early adopters and consist of a larger percentage of the
> > more highly technical part of the market. In other words, the popular
> > numbers for non-IE user percentage is 5%. With developers, especially
> > certain types of developers, security personnel, and architects, these
> > numbers are likely to be far different based on my experience.
> > A well-placed early adopter, often acting as a consultant or lead
> > technologist, can strongly influence a very large number of potential
> > clients and other technologists. Cross-platform support can indicate
> > health of a company, corporate philosophy, depth, and other attributes
> > that can affect competitiveness. Simple availability on all preferred
> > platforms can be a large factor.
> > I, like many long-time consultants and technologists, have had, and
> > continue to have, influence that could potentially affect very large
> > enterprise decisions for decades. This varies with client
> > relationships, topic, levels of credibility, etc. and there are no
> > guaruntees, but I definitely make sales for companies by recommendations
> > all the time. I probably prevent sales of those that I pan or pass up
> > for competitors.
> > I almost never use IE. I dislike it's interface, lack of features
> > (tabbed windows is a must), fakey responsiveness (even when I know a
> > server is down, IE happily fakes progress on the progress bar for a
> > while), completely distrust it from a security point of view, and I've
> > used Netscape since 0.9 when it was 800K on a floppy.
> > sdw
> > Sjoerd Visscher wrote:
> >> Rick Marshall wrote:
> >>> too bad. any plans for other browsers?
> >>> On Fri, 2004-04-16 at 14:17, Mike Fitzgerald wrote:
> >>>> ie 5.5+ only -Mike
> >> We need XSL, XPath and some form of contentEditable, so that leaves
> >> out a lot of browsers.
> >> Xopus could be made to work on Mozilla, but that would probably take a
> >> few months. We'd love to do it, but when you do the financial math,
> >> it's not worth it. 2 years ago Xopus (sort of) worked in Mozilla, but
> >> our customers clearly preferred a richer feature set in IE over
> >> compatability with Mozilla.
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
> initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>