Re: Shift_JIS conflict with CSS?

From: Unforgiven (jaapd3000_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 09/01/04 

Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 23:17:36 +0200

"Shez" <UseReplyAddress@nospam.uk.invalid> wrote in message
news:M5KdriCqUiNBFw0t@zerex.nospam.co.uk...
> In the faraway land of sci.lang.japan, dc <d3ntaku@gmail.com> said:
>>> Anyhow, if anyone has tips on using Open Office (western version) for
>>> mixed language documents and webpages that include Japanese, I'd be
>>> interested to hear them. My needs are basically for English stuff with
>>
>>I find OpenOff/write basically creates awful HTML, the preview is
>>nothing like a browser, even for basic word-processing, and it rips
>>out style *** references and reformats everything.
>
> That's odd, I found the preview looked almost exactly the same as in
> Firefox and IE.

That's not the definition of good HTML. Good HTML is HTML that the w3c
validator (http://validator.w3.org) says is valid.

> My previous experience with WYSIWYG programmes was that they wrote
> dreadfully convoluted HTML, however with OO the only cluttering it did
> was because it was trying to make my HTML compliant by sticking
> <p>...</p> round any loose bits of text and repeating my font tags
> within every paragraph. I usually stick in one global font tag that
> spans from <body> to </body>, but despite its elegance this is
> unfortunately considered bad HTML. (One of my niggles with the evolution
> of HTML is that elegant and intuitive constructions are being replaced
> by obscure long winded ones, e.g.
>
> background=pic.jpg
> by
> STYLE="background: url(pic.jpg) repeat scroll"

That's because you should use stylesheets, not inline style attributes. ^_^
Besides that, adding "repeat" and "scroll" is unnecessary since that's the
default value:
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/colors.html#background-properties

> The bottom line is that if you want a plain text editor that can input
> and display Japanese, do dictionary look ups, and save your work as
> UTF-8 or Shift_JIS, then JWPce fits the bill very nicely. The only
> drawbacks are that it's a bit of a pain if you're doing much English
> writing due to lack of smart quotes etc, and the fact that it displays
> unicode punctuation in a weird monospacing as if it were Japanese. Also
> you have to know your charset metatag syntax as it won't stick them in
> for you since it wasn't intended as a HTML editor.

You could always use emacs... ^_~

And if you want a very neat, full-featured, free WYSIWYG editor (Windows
2000 or better required though), you should check out the Microsoft Visual
Web Developer 2005 Express Beta. As a normal HTML editor (editing HTML
source) it's pretty much unbeatable, as it has IntelliSense, some very cool
and time-saving editing features, and can have your documents written to
conform to everything from HTML 4.01 to XHTML 1.1 Strict. What's more, it's
designer mostly leaves the code you've written alone (so far I've only been
able to catch it stripping out some non-significant whitespace) and can
generate standards-compliant code if you tell it too. It's standards support
is so complete that I've even seen it give IntelliSense information for CSS
properties that IE6 doesn't even support! Although it's tailored toward
people that design ASP.NET pages, it works fine as a plain HTML editor as
well. Also, its HTML formatting rules are fully customisable from the UI.
Check it out at:
http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/express/vwd/default.aspx 

-- 
Unforgiven
Quantcast