HTML Editor

[webangel]

i'm a newbie in HTML coding... i just want to ask, what is the best editor for HTML? ;)

[djr33]

A text based application that lets you deal with the html.

Some like plain old notepad.

Personally, I like dreamweaver... it saves time using some of the detauls so I don't have to type all that out, but it has a code/preview view option so my code is always showing.... never surprising me.

In general, WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) (preview-based) html editors have issues and will make more trouble than they are worth.

They can be a useful tool, but be SURE to keep an eye on the code.

If you just want to code a page because you need it done, fine, use something that does it for you.
If you want to learn this and/or get top-of-the-line or even error-free pages, code it by hand, or at least check by hand.

[jscheuer1]

Do you want to learn how to code or do you just want to make web pages and have the editor write the code for you?

[webangel]

i want to learn how to code :D

[jscheuer1]

Then I'd suggest getting a nice syntax highlighting editor like Edit Pad Pro. It is commercial but cheap, there are free ones available. Syntax highlighting allows you to see where tags begin and end and where their attributes are and where comments are, more easily due to color coding. Good editors also have some way of storing frequently used clips for easy insertion.

And use a nice tutorial site like this one:

http://www.w3schools.com/html/default.asp

[Twey]

Rather, I would recommend Vim (http://www.vim.org/). Unlike Edit Pad Pro, it is totally free and Free, and supports syntax highlighting and all the more and less common operations necessary in an advanced text editor. The interface can take some getting used to, but it is well worth the effort.

[jscheuer1]

Rather, I would recommend Vim (http://www.vim.org/). Unlike Edit Pad Pro, it is totally free and Free, and supports syntax highlighting and all the more and less common operations necessary in an advanced text editor. The interface can take some getting used to, but it is well worth the effort.

I went to the vim download page and followed the link path that any ordinary Windows user would, but stopped here (emphasis added):


Self-installing executable gvim##.exe gvim70.exe
For Vim 6 and later. This includes a GUI version of Vim - with many features and OLE support - and all the runtime files. It works well on MS-Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP. Use this if you have enough disk space and memory. It's the simplest way to start using Vim on the PC. The installer allows you to skip the parts you don't want.
For Vim 6.3 and later it also includes a console version, both for MS-Windows 95/98/ME and MS-Windows NT/2000/XP. The installer automatically selects the right one.
NOTE: Sophos Antivirus 3.58 detects the virus Troj/Momma-B in gvim61.exe, but this is a false alarm.

This is very lame and would stop most people with this platform from even bothering, stopped me.

[Twey]

Why?
Firstly, that doesn't even apply to the version linked to, it's for an older version (I'm guessing the link is dynamically generated); secondly, it's caused by the Sophos virus definitions people.
So, if you happen to run a version of Sophos that hasn't been updated in several months (latest is 4.05, the problem has been fixed in all virus definitions after 3.58), and want a specific back version of Vim, then this applies to you.
It's still not actually a threat or even really a problem ("Ignore" button anyone?) but it applies to you.
Now, let's see how this applies to the average user, who's not going to be using Sophos (which doesn't offer a Personal edition, only Enterprise and Small Business), and who, if s/he is, will probably be using the latest virus definitions, or at the very least a version later than 3.58, and who most likely wants the latest version of Vim.

:)

I disagree quite strongly with your tagging of informing users about this problem as "lame;" if you maintained a piece of software that was incorrectly marked as a virus by a piece of anti-virus software, what would you advise instead?

[jscheuer1]

Well, before I read the above, I overcame my reluctance and installed a minimal version and tested it with my virus scanner and it came up clean.

Let me clarify. I didn't mean to imply that the software was lame. I meant that it was lame that it would trigger an alert and users just had to trust someone's word not to worry about it.

Another thing, almost all editors of this type take some getting used to. That is also why they tend to inspire fierce loyalty in their users. However, starting out from scratch, one should just be patient. Once you get the hang of the one you have chosen, you will find its features indispensable.

[Twey]

Well, before I read the above, I overcame my reluctance and installed a minimal version and tested it with my virus scanner and it came up clean.Unless you run Sophos 3.58, I'm not surprised :)

Let me clarify. I didn't mean to imply that the software was lame.I know, and indicated as much.
I meant that it was lame that it would trigger an alert and users just had to trust someone's word not to worry about it.It is, but it is Sophos' fault for creating an unsuitably liberal virus definition, and the Vim developers have done the best they can to counteract the damage; not informing users of this problem would have been a much worse decision.

Another thing, almost all editors of this type take some getting used to. That is also why they tend to inspire fierce loyalty in their users. However, starting out from scratch, one should just be patient. Once you get the hang of the one you have chosen, you will find its features indispensable.I thought I said that. Vim is good among editors of this genre, however, since it includes a "vimtutor" program to help new users grasp the basics.

Oh, and I just proved the "fierce loyalty" part, didn't I. :) In fairness to my neutrality here, I was objecting to John's attack on the Vim developers' decision to inform users of the problem, and would have done the same if the developers of another piece of software was unfairly under question.

[Sashka]

My favorite is 1st JavaScript Editor (http://yaldex.com/JSFactory_Pro.htm)

[djr33]

As an html editor?

So... you're affiliated with them, linking so we buy the program?

No thanks.