Re: [LUG] Re: WYSIWYG HTML Editor

[Mark Evans <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Simon Waters wrote:

> I think the problem is WYSIWYG assumes you are using a type setting

Which HTML explicitally is not.

> tools, and inspite of the recent additions to the CSS standards for
> fancy font/typeface features, the clients for website only sometimes

It isn't mandatory for a browser to understand CSS, even if it does CSS
is only a "guide" rather than explicit instruction.

> render details as intended.

Or maybe render then exactly as the browser intended, which is nothing
like the way the web page designer wanted...

> I am the web designers nightmare, I surf with big fonts to avoid eye
> strain, and when I'm not using Firefox, or Konqueror, I'm using Lynx.
> You'd be amazed how many sites just crumble into unreadable with one
> application of "ctrl" + "+".

As well as comming up with foo.gif or bar.jpg all over the place.

Anyway you arn't doing anything which blind or partially sighted people
might have to do in order to read the site at all...

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature