Talk:HTML editor: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 19:20, 3 January 2007

Revision as of 20:08, 3 January 2007

Line 95:

:[[Palette window]] to be more specific. I linked the confusing terms. Designers use pallet to distinguish from the [[Dialog box]]es that are cumbersome to open and close and specify the type of [[Window (computing)|windows]].

::Ahh, it's an Apple Mac thing. --[[User:Nigelj|Nigelj]] 20:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

:[http://www.qianqin.de/en/blog/?20060525_qobject_and_mysql HTML Object editor] is an emerging term to describe the function rather than format of editing HTML [[Object (computer science)|objects]]. I used it for lack of a better word to describe the state between full text editing and WYSIWYG. I included this because the article's dichotomy of only two modes of HTML editing (text or WYSIWYG) was false. [[User:Oicumayberight|Oicumayberight]] 19:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

::Your link to a blog about storing software objects in a MySql database, and the WP article on software objects don't give me any confidence in all this: neither have anything to do with editing HTML as if it were an object-oriented markup language, which is what I think you have written about. Do you have any examples or references for this? --[[User:Nigelj|Nigelj]] 20:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Lastly, I'm worried about the bullet points in the 'Criticism of WYSIWYG editors' section now. It seems to read, "Some people say ''this'' criticism, but they're ''wrong, wrong, wrong'' for all the following reasons..." over and over again. It reads more like a "how to win an argument against people who criticise your editor" guide. If that's a balanced NPOV view, then the subheading is now certainly wrong as there are no criticisms left.

Line 105 ⟶ 107:

:There are criticisms left, just not left unrebutted. I would be fine with deleting the rebuttals as long as the unfair criticisms are deleted with it. [[User:Oicumayberight|Oicumayberight]] 19:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

::We don't need to get partisan about this! It's not a case of whether a criticism is "fair", but whether it is valid, current and documented elsewhere. Similarly with the established benefits. As an encyclopedia we just try to reflect and report what is known and documented elsewhere. --[[User:Nigelj|Nigelj]] 20:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)