In article <32q485F3p00bhU1@individual.net>,
Lars Behrens wrote:
> Henri Sivonen wrote:
> > Actually, the HTML markup produced by OOo Writer/Web is exceptionally
> > sane (often cleaner than the markup produced by Nvu/Composer) if you
> > don't edit styles in OOo but add a style sheet later.
> But what's the use of a wysiwyg editor then? ;-)
I don't use it as a "WYSIWYG" editor (problematic concept considering
the Web). I use it as an editor that allows me to write lightly
structured (headings, paragraphs, lists) documents without having to
> And how do I put the style markup in?
Using your favorite text editor or a small script.
> A short test showed that OOo writes the source in all uppercase letters
> and still makes use of and tags.
If you ask for bold or italics, and are the most
appropriate markup. If you want generic emphasis, ask for generic
emphasis, which is supported as well.
instead of is silly.
> Don't want to start a flame war here, but still I would say, that someone
> with few or no knowledge of web coding is better off with nvu.
Their paragraphs won't be. Hopefully this area will be improved as the
development of Nvu goes on. Also, I don't like tho way Nvu sprinkles
style='...' all over if you are not careful.
I use Nvu for retouching existing pages, because Nvu doesn't mess
everything up in that case like OOo does.
Mozilla Web Author FAQ: http://mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html