From: Nando D. <na...@de...> - 2004-08-08 11:08:57
|
Hello, it looks to me that XXE does not allow <sect*> tags in an easy way. Is that true? I have only found the ability to use <section> tags, optionally nested, but IIRC it's not the recommended practice, is it? Also, it produces unreadable XML code. Can it be instructed to prettify it some way or should I open the files with XML Spy to achieve that? Thanks -- Nando Dessena mailto:na...@de... |
From: Paul V. <pa...@vi...> - 2004-08-08 11:51:31
|
Hi Nando, > it looks to me that XXE does not allow <sect*> tags in an easy > way. Is that true? If you press the button with the paragraph sign (near the right end of the toolbar) you can choose between <section> and <sectN> tags. The ones that aren't allowed at the cursor position will be disabled. To create a sibling section following the one you're in, it can be done even quicker: in the Node Path bar (below the toolbar, this can show e.g. "book chapter section section para" or "article sect1 sect2 para warning", depending on where you are), Ctrl-Click on the node you want to "duplicate" and a new, empty node of that type will be added. With Shift-Click, the new node will be inserted before the current one. This works for all types of nodes, not only sections. (There are also other ways, e.g. via the menus or the "Insert After" box, but these take more time.) > I have only found the ability to use <section> tags, optionally > nested, but IIRC it's not the recommended practice, is it? It wasn't, but our transformation stylesheets have been improved at this point so now it doesn't matter anymore. Use what you like. > Also, it produces unreadable XML code. Can it be instructed to > prettify it some way or should I open the files with XML Spy to > achieve that? Somewhere after a version upgrade (I don't remember which one) XXE suddenly wrote out prettified, very readable XML files. Via Options -> Save you can configure indentation, line length etcetera. It pays to check for new versions every now and then; they seem to be getting a lot of user feedback, and listening to it. Greetings, Paul Vinkenoog |
From: Nando D. <na...@de...> - 2004-08-08 12:54:25
|
Paul, P> If you press the button with the paragraph sign (near the right end of P> the toolbar) you can choose between <section> and <sectN> tags. The P> ones that aren't allowed at the cursor position will be disabled. Well, that was my problem. I couldn't figure out why I had the sect* options always disabled. I think I have got the rationale now. P> To create a sibling section following the one you're in, it can be P> done even quicker: in the Node Path bar (below the toolbar, this can P> show e.g. "book chapter section section para" or "article sect1 sect2 P> para warning", depending on where you are), Ctrl-Click on the node you P> want to "duplicate" and a new, empty node of that type will be added. P> With Shift-Click, the new node will be inserted before the current P> one. This works for all types of nodes, not only sections. Precious tip! P> Somewhere after a version upgrade (I don't remember which one) XXE P> suddenly wrote out prettified, very readable XML files. Via Options -> P> Save you can configure indentation, line length etcetera. It pays to P> check for new versions every now and then; they seem to be getting a P> lot of user feedback, and listening to it. Yep. The only problem is that it is using LF as a line separator instead of CRLF, but this is a problem only under Windows and an easily solved one anyway. Thanks a lot! -- Nando Dessena mailto:na...@de... |
From: Paul V. <pa...@vi...> - 2004-08-08 13:11:04
|
Hi Nando, > P> Somewhere after a version upgrade (I don't remember which one) > P> XXE suddenly wrote out prettified, very readable XML files. > Yep. The only problem is that it is using LF as a line separator > instead of CRLF, but this is a problem only under Windows and an > easily solved one anyway. Word and Wordpad display LF-files correctly. Notepad doesn't, but I don't care because I use Context as my default text (and XML) viewer/editor. During installation you even have the option of replacing Notepad with Context (for apps that hard-link to Notepad.exe). I did this, and my life is much happier now :-) Greetings, Paul Vinkenoog |
From: Nando D. <na...@de...> - 2004-08-08 13:26:39
|
Paul, P> Notepad doesn't, but P> I don't care because I use Context as my default text (and XML) P> viewer/editor. During installation you even have the option of P> replacing Notepad with Context (for apps that hard-link to P> Notepad.exe). I did this, and my life is much happier now :-) Boy do I hate ConTEXT! It must have something to do with the fact that in several cases it vaporized my files if I double-clicked on them and they were on a network path. Not a pleasant experience. I never got around to discover whether it was ConTEXT or some other actor in my environment, I just deleted it together with its ugly option of overwriting notepad and forgot it. Now the name is enough to make me shiver. ;-) I am a happy user of NoteTab lite at work - I only have notepad on my notebook but I'll fix it soon. ;-) P.S. I'm not the only one. See http://tinyurl.com/6vq72 Ciao -- Nando Dessena mailto:na...@de... |
From: Milan B. <mi...@km...> - 2004-08-08 14:46:24
|
Nando Dessena wrote: > P> Notepad doesn't, but > P> I don't care because I use Context as my default text (and XML) > P> viewer/editor. During installation you even have the option of > P> replacing Notepad with Context (for apps that hard-link to > P> Notepad.exe). I did this, and my life is much happier now :-) > > Boy do I hate ConTEXT! It must have something to do with the fact that > in several cases it vaporized my files if I double-clicked on them and > they were on a network path. Not a pleasant experience. I never got > around to discover whether it was ConTEXT or some other actor in my > environment, I just deleted it together with its ugly option of > overwriting notepad and forgot it. Now the name is enough to make me > shiver. ;-) I'm also an ex-ConText user. It made my Windows crash too many times. I started to use SciTE after that, and I find it perfect. Milan. |
From: Paul V. <pa...@vi...> - 2004-08-08 16:10:52
|
Nando wrote: > Boy do I hate ConTEXT! It must have something to do with the fact > that in several cases it vaporized my files if I double-clicked on > them and they were on a network path. Milan wrote: > I'm also an ex-ConText user. It made my Windows crash too many > times. I started to use SciTE after that, and I find it perfect. Thanks for the warnings, guys! I'll look into this and possibly dump Context too... although I love it and have never experienced such problems. But then I rarely access text files over my network. Greetings, Paul Vinkenoog |
From: Phil S. <ph...@sh...> - 2004-08-10 13:28:01
|
Nando Dessena wrote: Hi, > Boy do I hate ConTEXT! It must have something to do with the fact that > in several cases it vaporized my files if I double-clicked on them and > they were on a network path. FWIW, I have used ConTEXT for years, mainly to edit network based files, and have never had any problems. Phil -- Firdbird has my support, has it got yours? - www.firebirdsql.org/ff/foundation/ Find a better way of life, play Marbles - www.marillion.com ICQ: 760757 | AIM: pjshrimpton | Y!: pjshrimpton | pjs...@ja... |