What is your favorite HTML editor

I use scintilla from scintilla.org I prefer to use simple editor with color coding than the automate one.
It's much better to type it myself and grow familiar with the codes.

 

Personally, I use Aptana.

 

Notepad ++. That makes the job for me!

 

Hands down "Namo" is the best.

 

Yeah, but the whole point is that Dreamweaver is one application. Also, do you work on 6KB websites or something? Uploading an entire directory would be a waste of time for anyone working on a big project.

Solution: Don't use the design view

Why do you have to make it in Dreamweaver? Is it because everyone knows how to use it, and it is pretty much industry standard?

The first thing I want to say, is that xHTML 1.1 has nothing wrong with it. I mean, I will actually laugh if you're using classic HTML.

To "Invalid or unsemantic code" and "Bloated, badly nested code (almost a certainty)", the code structure is nothing to do with the application: it's the designer. Unless they're using the design view, and if they are, then they have no place in http:// society.

Hmm, I wonder how many websites won't look good when images are disabled... A lot, maybe? Also, most people shouldn't even use frames, and if they do, then again, they aren't the smartest. Javascript, is unfortunately popular, but my websites will work without it.

I would love to hear your opinion on mine, blueparukia. I look forward to hearing from you.

 

I use KDevelop and Kate.

 

Notepad++, I love it and wouldn't think of using anything else.

 

I'm curious to know where it was that I said Photoshop was a great way to design an entire website. Photoshop is a powerfull program for graphic design. I originally started with PSP, a good application that's fine for most peoples needs, but I've since surpassed what I can do on PSP with Photoshop. Even now I still feel as if I'm only scratching the surface with it.

I certainly wouldn't use it for my entire sites design, but it's perfect for logo design. My site design begins and ends with dreamweaver.

All of my buttons are coded in CSS, along with any other design aspect I can get away with. It makes for a cleaner looking site that loads faster. There's also certain SEO advantages of providing anchor text to your navigation links.

There's nothing wrong with Flash as long as it's used correctly. Just because some idiots build pure flash based sites doesn't mean you should avoid it completely. If you're designing sites for clients then it's worth its weight in gold. I've found that nothing gets a client more excited than seeing something move around on their website. It's a great way to upsell a $5oo project to something that's $5000+.

Acrobat is nice for sending mock ups or similar stuff. Since the average Joe has no idea how to unlock a pdf, it's less likely that they'll copy your work or monkey around with it.

Is it worth the money by itself? Of course not, but it's just one nice feature in a whole suite of programs.

If you're using another program to upload your site it's no longer just one click. You gotta open the FTP client, login to your sites server, select what you want to upload, select where to upload it, and then you're at the point where it's "just one click". Yes I know a few extra steps won't kill anyone, but it's a nice feature most html editors don't have. Also you with dreamweaver you don't have to upload the entire directory. You can upload the page you're working on along with any images or stylesheets that go with it, with just one click. If you're working on a large site that can be a huge difference.

That's really not a temptation for anyone who knows how to hand code a website and has seen the output of WYSIWYG.

That only supports my argument that there will be times when using an Adobe product is unavoidable. Get used to it, odds are this won't be the last time.

Just because many graphic designers think they can expand into the world of web design without learning html and css; doesn't mean that everyone who uses CS3 can't code. There are ways create webpages in CS3 without the slice tool.

Since I write all my pages and validate them none of those points are an issue with my sites.

I can understand if price is an issue, but if you're buying the whole bundle there's no reason not to use Dreamweaver. It's a better program.

 

I use Dreamweaver CS3 in Code View, and it is the best code editor there is, period. If you can get it for free and if your computer is like mine, NOTHING will beat it. It starts in less than 2 seconds on my computer, not exaggerating. It is simply a pleasure to work with (at least on my machine, not on the macs we use at school).

And if you're coding yourself, using code view, your pages will be valid and clean, if you have the skills to do it.

I also want to say that blueparukia is a complete "noob" and obviously doesn't know anything about web design if he uses fireworks and design view to make his websites, as well as thinking that you can make a complete website in photoshop, and that photoshop sucks.

 

Notepad, simple but efective.

 

Editplus and Dreamweaver.

 

You may think so. But for many, its not a better program. I prefer to use Notepad++ to edit my code, its lighter and does everything I need it to do. I can even load Notepad++ and a separate FTP program faster than Dreamweaver alone.

 

I use Notepad++

 

You must have a slow system or a lack of memory. I've never had an issue with dreamweaver's load time. Even when my taskbar is jam packed with other running apps.

 

I use Dreamweaver in code view or Notepad++ cause of the syntax highlighting and tabs.
I tend to use dreamweaver more though cause I like the highlighting better and it kinda makes everything go faster and smoother for me.

 

Yeah, same for me

 

Dreamweaver is my favorite HTML editor.

 

Photoshop can be nice enough for logos. I'd still rather use Fireowrks because of being able to save a backup copy in vector format. Though thats personal preference.

Good to hear. Seems you know more than I give you credit for. All my buttons (where I have images for buttons) are made in Fireworks (with no text of course), then that image is normally cropped to 1px wide (where it is able to repeat-x) then applied as a background image to the link, couple it with CSS sliding doors to have a rollover effect, and also specify a background colour, so it works on browsers with images disabled.

Everyone who uses Dreamweave WYSIWYG can't code, or is a lazy person (not directed at you). Regardless of the fact that there are alternatives to slicing, very few people will actually do it. And btw, I have nothing against CS3 or Adobe as a whole, just Dreamweaver.

I am talking as in Dreamweaver as a standalone program. You pay $400 or so for: a standard FTP program, a WYSIWYG editor which ruins your dignity, and a text editor that comes as standard in most advanced text editors. In a 250MB download. Their isn't more than 50MB worth of features in it.

Which is my original point. For games and videos. Using it for banners, menus, and whole sites is a bad, bad idea, and will have me (and most of Regional Australia) off the site pretty quick. All Flash and no substance.
Standards > Money.

You'd be surprised how many people loathe being given a document that they can not edit, or select text. It's eqivelant to taking a screenshot and sending the image, just taller.

I was this close to taking you seriously before you said that. Now I am lauging and seem to be unable to stop. Saying you use xHTML 1.1 proves you know diddly squat about standards compliance. Real xHTML 1.1 will not be deployable in Internet explorer for many years, since I am fairly certain they left that out of IE8.
If you are not using real xHTML 1.1 you are serving it as text/html - which is HTML - and going against the xHTML standards, as xHTML 1.1 must be served as application/xml+xhtml (I think, could be xhtml+xml).

That leaves 2 other modern standards = HTML 4.01 and xHTML 1.0.

No one gives a crap what you use. They are almost identical if you use a strict doctype (which you should always do). When it all comes down to its simplest form, it's a preference of whether you want to use <br> or <br/>.

I booted up Dreamweaver today, and decided to set it up how I liked it.

1. Created a new document, and get into code view.
2. Wrote out a few basic things.
3. Got fed up with autocomplete. Turned off autoclosing tas and TML hints - I know all my HTML tags thanks.
4. Wrote some more code. Changed the colour of syntax highlighting a bit.
5. Realised Dreamweaver had added whitespace after </html>. Didn't like that, so removed it.
6. Clicked on FTP/RDS servers. Froze my 2.67GHz PC with 2GB of RAM. Waited for it to unfreeze.
7. Waited for it to unfreeze, the entered my details and it seemed to go smoothly.
8. Tried to find the upload button. Couldn;t be bothered so within 5 clicks I'd uploaded my file and stylesheet with SmartFTP.
9. Closed Dreamweaver FTP and opened it again. Took me 2 clicks just to connect to the server. Still cannot find my upload button.
10. Opened Notepad++. Realised it had an FTP client. Same basic interface as Dreamweaver, again I used SmartFTP to make my life easier.
11. Got bored of coding pointless things and started playing Roller Coaster Tycoon 3.

 

First thing is, that I don't care if Internet Explorer supports XHTML 1.1 properly. It supports it enough to view the website nicely, and past that, I don't give a damn. Internet Explorer 8, however should have some good upgrades, and it now supports CSS properly. I've tested it, it's great, but it still looks way too tacky. Also, in the next 10 years, Internet Explorer may no longer be "the norm". And in the next 10 years, Internet Explorer will probably comply to all the standards set by W3.org.

For the moment however, Internet Explorer 7 and below can't render CSS or HTML properly. Full stop.

Second thing is this: "Tried to find the upload button". There are two main FTP actions you can perform - "Put", and "Get". "Get" will get the selected files from the file menu, download them from the FTP site, and replace the current ones. "Put" gets the selected files from the file menu, and replaces the ones on the FTP site with the ones you have selected. The buttons are red and green arrows.

Also, you can press CTRL+SHIFT+U, which will upload the file you're working on to the FTP site.

Oh, and the find and replace tool in Dreamweaver kicks the Notepad++'s one's arse.

One last thing: Dreamweaver froze your 2.67GHz PC with 2GB of RAM? My Intel PC (E2140, 1GB RAM) and my AMD PC (4200+ X2, 2GB RAM) both run Dreamweaver without problems. Are you running a Pentium 4?

 

I am running an Intel Core 2 Duo E6750

It doesn't support it at all. Meaning if you use it and it works in IE, you are using just plain ol' HTML.

Random. especially when it is almost exactly the same as Notepad++s...you can search entire folders, files, use Regexs, search only in selection etc etc.

Almost no difference, except Notepad++'s is in tabs and Dreamweaver uses a drop down menu.