UltraEdit uses deprecated toolbar

Dec 13, 2005 in Web standards.

UltraEdit is one of the best text editors out there and I have recently spent some time using version 11. It has a lot of features that will aid the development process, such as Unicode/UTF-16 support and code folding, in addition to the excellent functions already delivered in previous versions.

However, as always, there are some things I don’t like. Such as the brand new HTML toolbar, preconfigured with several popular functions. I suppose someone thought this was a great idea, and in a way I can see why. Unfortunately the generated code leaves a lot to wish for. For example, there’s an icon for “HTML Foreground Color” which will generate the following code:

And “HTML Align Left”, which gives this:

This is classic but deprecated code. I’m sorry to see that a lot of tools continue to keep this legacy in their new versions, but this is even worse – introducing it in a new version 2005! The toolbar can be modified, but the problem is that the people who actually would spend a few minutes to configure it are the same people who doesn’t need the toolbar to begin with.

Example of generated HTML snippets.

This formatting should be done with CSS. Example:

p.example { text-align: right }

Foo

That said and done, I still think UltraEdit is a great product and recommend it to anyone for text editing, but be careful with the built-in stuff. Just because it’s there doesn’t mean you have to use it.

Comments

Patrik Sonestad
21 Dec, 2005

So true, but just putting CSS-code in your HTML-file is almost as bad as putting in deprecated code. Even if it’s more “kosher”, CSS-code should be put in CSS-files, if not only for the “good looks” ;)
Also, many “editors” like DreamWeaver for example are totally nuts when using the “standard” way to use CSS. There be millions of styles in a single HTML-file and there can be gazillions of styles if you have many HTML-files. Nope, separate form from style the way “God” meant it ;)
Reine
22 Dec, 2005

I totally agree that CSS-code should be placed in CSS-files, and I have done that for the last seven years. The reason why I used inline code above was for the example to be as short as possible. It is an extremely simple code snippet, but I still wanted to include it for completeness sake.
You are also correct about Dreamweaver. I wouldn’t dream of letting it’s design view get anywhere near my markup. I think that the latest version is a major improvement and I have no problem with people who use it for editing and managing files, but using Dreamweaver for the entire site construction process is a highway to hell.