![]() On Jan 25, 2013, at 4:19 AM, Greg Chapman wrote: And I suspect you'll find BG makes creating properly designed web pages easier than ay of the other tools you mentioned. So why switch to another tool that makes it easier to create a *terribly designed* web page? Instead, you should be focused on creating *properly designed* web pages, and tools that make this easier. ![]() There are reasons that web standards call for different approaches to be used. Whatever it is you are trying to accomplish with direct font size control might look good on your screen but terrible on someone else's. Which is to say, almost anything you might be trying to do to access font sizes directly is the *wrong* thing to do when designing for the web, which is why web standards have developed to discourage people from even trying. So font sizing is just inherently different affair, and it is an enormous mistake to try designing for the web as if you were designing for a printed document. But anyhow, you simply must understand that the difference between Word and Office one hand and BG on the other is that the former are tools that are intended to produce results on *physical paper* in which everything has a specific *physical size* that will nit ever change once you print the document, whereas BG is a tool for producing results that are to be displayed on *web pages* which might be viewed on any of a zillion different screen sizes, with any of a zillion different user resolution settings. > somewhat like Microsoft Word, Open Office or even KompozerĪs Daniel mentions, mentioning Kompozer here is ironic. > editor that claims to be wysiwyg to work > I had thought that BlueGriffon was a wysiwyg web editor. On Jan 24, 2013, at 8:57 PM, James Holland wrote:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |