| 8:15 pm on Jun 3, 2002 (gmt 0)|
This works in Dreamweaver, although there is a bug in Dreamweaver UltraDev 4 which doesn't accept hand entered code every time.
| 5:42 pm on Jun 4, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Thanks tx. I'm not keen on the sound of "doesn't accept hand entered code every time", but the main reason is to let someone with no experience change the text in a site without hurting it in any way.
The other options are text editing (requiring someone who can read HTML to a minor extent) or just parsing the existing documents into form elements, but that would take a little time to set up.
Maybe one of those coloured syntax highlighting editors would be the easiest compromise.
| 6:03 pm on Jun 4, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Probably the best idea would be to invest a little time in server-side handling and editing with forms.
But, as your not so keen on that callum, why not just do something like this:
<!-- You can edit between this line -->
<p>text in here</p>
<!-- and this one. Please don't touch anything else you muppet. -->
| 6:08 pm on Jun 4, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I haven't *noticed* GoLive (v5) changing my code at all... but if you don't set the preferences correctly, it will insert the "creator" meta tag when the document is saved.
However, once I get very heavily into CSS, I noticed that wholesale cutting and pasting of text blocks in the WYSIWYG window often messed up the CSS divs, so it depends on how the page is set up. I've seen some truly amazing auto-generated nested divs that cropped up when I wasn't paying attention.
If you kept the "to be edited" text within a single-cell table, or some other code-buffer you'd probably be OK. Then again, I like the muppet idea. ;)
| 6:24 pm on Jun 4, 2002 (gmt 0)|
mivox thats a problem with most all wysiwyg editors is the insertion and code manipulation per the programs best 'idea' should be instead of having it the way you want it.
Ive had to change editors because they wouldnt follow my rules. Luckileeee in FP now it can have all that stuff turned off so I use it like a text editor that just has the FP extension stuff built in ;) heheh some would say that defeats the purpose of a visual editor though.
| 6:25 pm on Jun 4, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for the suggestion, Nick, but I'm currently thinking about converting a an old site to another language. If I was starting it from scratch then it would be in a content management system, making changes easy. If they're ever likely to want further languages then it might be worth converting it anyway.
It's all valid, so the idea of an SGML parse tree in a form via CGI seems to make sense, with all inline elements as INPUT boxes and all block level elements as TEXTAREA boxes. I haven't considered how to approach nesting, though. (eg. SPAN inside A inside P inside LI inside UL inside TD inside...).
I don't recall ever coming across a non-WYSIWYG HTML editor that hides all the HTML but allows content to be edited. Anyone?
Thanks mivox, I'll look into GoLive as well.
| 7:03 pm on Jun 4, 2002 (gmt 0)|
can't say i have seen a non-wysiwyg editor doing that either.
I have not as yet come accross a wysiwyg that, when you start doing any sort of formatting, does not add its own quirky mix of unnecessary html in one way or another.
| 8:04 pm on Jun 4, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>main reason is to let someone with no experience change the text in a site without hurting it in any way.
I'm thinking about this for someone with no knowledge at all who wants to do self-updates on a monthly specials page.
It seems the safest way is to set it up so that the changeable section will use SSI. That way all else would stay intact, and if anything got messed up it would just be that one part of the page, which would be easier to fix than if it were the whole thing.