Buffistas

Angel: Yeah, I never told anyone about this, but I-I liked your poems. Spike: You like Barry Manilow.

'Hell Bound'

Buffistechnology 3: "Press Some Buttons, See What Happens."

Got a question about technology? Ask it here. Discussion of hardware, software, TiVos, multi-region DVDs, Windows, Macs, LINUX, hand-helds, iPods, anything tech related. Better than any helpdesk!

First Previous Next Last Recent

Typo Boy - Jun 30, 2009 8:56:06 pm PDT #10592 of 25501

Calli: My people have a saying. A man who trusts can never be betrayed, only mistaken.Avon: Life expectancy among your people must be extremely short.

I use Coffee Cup HTML editor for submitting works to on-line publishers. It lets me compose in visual editor so I can concentrate on writing, then produces very vanilla html that can be plugged into just about any blog template or online content management without messing it up.

But I've never really been comfortable composing in it. I still like composing in word processors, but none of them produce anything like as clean html. Coffee Cup has of course tons of capabilities that I don't use, because I'm not making a web site - I'm submitting my deathless prose to someone to format as they like, with only very basic formatting on my part. Is there something out there that is frankly a better word processor, and even if a worse html editor, but can still do the whole "very vanilla html" thing.

Gris - Jul 01, 2009 3:13:06 am PDT #10593 of 25501

Hey. New board.

Hmm. I'm not sure, Typo Boy. Pretty much anything that's designed to make standalone HTML is going to use CSS these days so as to guarantee more complete WYSIWYG. For example, the TextEdit program included with Mac OS X can save RTF as HTML, but it uses very simple CSS to make the paragraphs look like.

I used to have a livejournal client that let you edit visually, and since LJ required vanilla HTML it came out nice and vanilla, but pretty much anything that's designed to work as a word processor is going to fail at the "very vanilla" code rule.

tommyrot - Jul 01, 2009 4:53:47 am PDT #10594 of 25501

Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.

Anyone tried Firefox 3.5 yet? Any word on stability?

Gudanov - Jul 01, 2009 4:56:04 am PDT #10595 of 25501

Coding and Sleeping

I've been using it since beta. Seems plenty stable.

tommyrot - Jul 01, 2009 1:09:43 pm PDT #10596 of 25501

Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.

Anyone use SQL Server (especially SQL Server 2008) to generate XML?

tommyrot - Jul 01, 2009 4:16:03 pm PDT #10597 of 25501

Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.

From Lifehacker, a good analysis of Google Voice: [link]

le nubian - Jul 01, 2009 4:32:54 pm PDT #10598 of 25501

"And to be clear, I am the hell. And the high water."

I really like GV - I used it when it was grandcentral. If I could send and receive faxes, I would be golden.

Jessica - Jul 02, 2009 4:32:24 am PDT #10599 of 25501

And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset

Gmail's drag&drop label update broke my Folders4Gmail extension. Anyone know if there's a workaround for this?

amych - Jul 02, 2009 4:37:31 am PDT #10600 of 25501

Now let us crush something soft and watch it fountain blood. That is a girlish thing to want to do, yes?

I don't use Folders4Gmail, but there's an "older version" link at the top of the page that you might try -- with the disclaimer that I don't know how old the older version in question is or whether it breaks anything else you need.

Jessica - Jul 02, 2009 4:52:40 am PDT #10601 of 25501

And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset

Yeah, that version is pretty old - not quite flat HTML, but close enough.

I'm sure the Folders4Gmail people will have an update soon.

First Previous Next Last Recent