E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 1 (In chronological order)

From: Vlad Alexander (XStandard)
Date: Thu, Nov 30 2006 10:00AM
Subject: Re: CMS modernity (was: address tag)
No previous message | No next message

Hi Alastair,

>If it were keyboard (and screen reader) accessible I'd
> consider it a viable option at work. (I know they are
> working on that, but I don't think it's come to
> fruition yet.)
Info on our progress in this area is available here:
http://accessifyforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=4931

>> The nice thing about Xstandard is that, to an extent,
>> you can steer folks in the right direction by limiting
>> the styles and markup they can use.
>It does to a certain extent, but I'm not sure it goes far enough.
Can you please elaborate? What things would you like to see improved?

>>Xstandard's table editor is fairly robust
>I've only tried the free one so far, which wasn't wrong,
> but didn't go far enough
There are some enhancements coming to the table authoring in the next release for both the Lite and Pro versions. For example, XStandard will be the first editor to resize column width by dragging using the col element. When you are at the stage of reviewing this functionality, we may be able to get you a dev build with the table authoring enhancements.

Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com



-------- Original Message --------
From: Alastair Campbell
Date: 11/30/2006 11:30 AM
>> Xstandard is quite nice.
>
> It is, certainly in terms of code produced.
>
> The last stage of that set of posts will be to hold up the three main
> free ones against each of the criteria I've explored, both in 'out of
> the box' form and once configured as best I can.
>
> If it were keyboard (and screen reader) accessible I'd consider it a
> viable option at work. (I know they are working on that, but I don't
> think it's come to fruition yet.)
>
>> The nice thing about Xstandard is that, to an extent, you can steer
>> folks in the right direction by limiting the styles and
>> markup they can use.
>
> It does to a certain extent, but I'm not sure it goes far enough. In
> our's we've been fairly successful with that general approach so far,
> especially if you set things up to *look* wrong when the underlying code
> is wrong.
>
>> That said, no matter how hard you try, someone can still STRONG a
>> line of text instead of making it a H* tag.
>
> True, although something like strong {display: run-in;} can highlight
> that if supported, or an "onsave" check could test for that.
>
> One of my next posts is on preventing problems, if anyone would like to
> email me typical problems please do! I'll have a go at coming up with
> solutions that could be built into editors/CMSs.
>
>> The only real way around that is to have very specific and definted
>> content templates...which seem great in theory, but tend to be a real
>> pain in the real world for a lot of web sites.
>
> True, but if the editor came with a basic set that would reduce the pain
> significantly.
>
>> Also, while not ideal, Xstandard's table editor is fairly robust (I
>> noticed you were complaining about that in other WYSIWYG
>> editors on your blog).
>
> I've only tried the free one so far, which wasn't wrong, but didn't go
> far enough (if you look at the functionality I proposed). I'll try the
> paid for version when I'm at that stage.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> -Alastair
>