Re: WebCat/CyberStudio Compatibility
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 1998
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 21574
interpreted = N
texte = > I'm planning to use GoLive CyberStudio 3.0 with WebCatalog. Are there> any known problems or shortcomings related to using CyberStudio 3.0? Does> anyone have any strong recommendations of CyberStudio vs Dreamweaver?> This question is with regard to integration of WebDNA with HTML using> these publishing tools only, not with regard to personal preference of> one tool vs the other, so please keep responses relevant to WebDNA> integration issues.>> Thanks,> BrianWe've been using CyberStudio since version 1.x and have found that it's probably the best (over PageMill, HomePage, Fusion, etc [haven't played much with Dreamweaver]).Layout capabilities are good, it can successfully debug itself, and you can open up little snippets of HTML code that you plan on using as [include]s (although you have to change the prefs on the file extensions to open as HTML vs. TEXT).Like everyone else has mentioned, I do the code and the layout first and then pop it into BBEdit for cleanup and adding DNA. Most DNA can be added in CyberStudio, but [founditems] with tables gets screwed up (CS wants them within the
and not outside) and pop-up menus get screwed up. CS handles DNA in URL tags well and doesn't rewrite them, but can get messed up with &, < and > (like using them in a [math] tag).FWIW, the new BBEdit 5.0 has a CyberStudio cleaner/optimizer and generally I run all my pages through BBEdit's HTML syntax checker for