[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2003/08/24]
> Command option V to view source, command A to select all, command C > to copy, command tab until the editor is frontmost, command shift N > for New Window with Selection (or command N, command V if you have an > inferior editor, perhaps). > > Hmm, which of those is quicker and easier? If you just want to save a copy of the web page and don't care what happens to it after that, Command S. Or (right-click save-as...). What you originally described was copying bits of code into another document, in which case CmdOptV select-copy-paste is just as fast as CmdE select-copy-paste, with the additional bonus of avoiding the "You have unsaved changes" dialog when you eventually close the window and discard the redundant copy. What's best depends on the operation you're performing, and I'm not at all sure I can understand what operation you're doing that makes "open in an editor" the obvious convenient choice. > So just as I hate the browsers mentioned for not giving me an option > to view in external editors, you should hate Opera for not giving you > the option not to. If I hated all software that made some rare operation slightly inconvenient I'd have to spend the rest of my days in an Amish community. > >Why bring up an editor on a document that I can't modify, or save it > >to some worthless randomly-named file I can't keep track of. > Funnily enough, good external editor implementations give fairly > meaningful names, at least to my eyes. And they pick the right folder all the time? > >The "View Source" browser lets me do everything I need, without losing > >track of the fact that I *am* only looking at a snapshot and make > >changes to the wrong document. > Usually I can keep that straight in my mind. If not, I'll try to > preview one or the other document and realise my mistake. No big > problem. I envy you, that you've never inadvertantly edited the wrong version of a file. > >If you want to open in an editor, use Mozilla. Select "File -> Edit > >Page" and it'll toss you into Composer which is one of the better HTML > >editors I've ever used. > Sadly, I hate Mozilla, as it's a bloated pile of crap that takes > something like three weeks to load. It's a Mac, how often do you load a program? > Oh, and I quite like plain text > editors for HTML, rather than 'WYSIWYG' abortions. Last time I > looked, Composer is one of those. Composer provides four presentations of the document: a typical WYSIWYG editor, a tags-visible editor similar to the old Word Perfect tag view, a plaintext editor, and a preview.There's stuff above here
Generated at 14:02 on 01 Jul 2004 by mariachi 0.52