Adobe & HTML

http://html.adobe.com/

by v33ra • 14 years ago

97 70 14 years ago

html.adobe.com

tommi3• 14 years ago

Sad how the samples don't have any working fallback but break hideously on Chrome 19.

Zr40• 14 years ago

They're working fine for me in Chrome 18 and Webkit nightly, though not in Safari 5.1.5.

tommi3• 14 years ago

Yes, but are you using the experimental --enable-css-regions switch?

RossM• 14 years ago

On the Tools and Services page, this piqued my interest:

> Code

> We think there’s a need for a different type of code editor – we’re working on something and will have more to share soon.

bonjourmr2• 14 years ago

But what's wrong with Dreamweaver? /s

artursapek2• 14 years ago

Joking aside, Dreamweaver got me into HTML and CSS six years ago when I was 13 and now I have a pretty awesome job developing. Like pdenya states, it's definitely not for power users. But it has its place.

pdenya• 14 years ago

Same, but I've never used an adobe product thats fast, responsive, and made for power users. I don't want another editor that's trying to hold my hand like dreamweaver.

prawn• 14 years ago

Not originally Adobe, but Homesite?

Bit embarrassing, but I actually still use Allaire's Cold Fusion Studio from 1999. I think that was, at the time, the big brother to Homesite.

Trezoid• 14 years ago

Photoshop is fast, responsive and made for power users, illustrator and in-design more-so. In fact, all three are absolutely best in class with nothing even close to challenging them.

The problem is more that they don't compete well when the opposition are just text editors, and where people are perfectly happy to remove all the visual stuff.

5h• 14 years ago

have you looked at muse (http://www.adobe.com/products/muse.html) and the sort of sites that come out the other end (http://juliegratz.com/)

I hope that's not what they have in mind, quite why they are showing off a website who's homepage doesn't have a single bit of text (view-source:http://juliegratz.com/) other than a copyright assertion I have no idea

james4k• 14 years ago

Wow! At first I thought Adobe had jumped into the browser market. That would be interesting.

TazeTSchnitzel2• 14 years ago

They might. They have been contributing to WebKit.

sparknlaunch122• 14 years ago

They lost on flash. Will they lose on html and CSS?

artursapek2• 14 years ago

"If you can't improve them with your own plugin, join them."

qxcv• 14 years ago

They did not "lose" on Flash. 99% market penetration[0] is not losing. I doubt they'll "lose" on HTML and CSS any more than they lost on Dreamweaver, they'll simply pull an Autodesk[1] and target the education and training market. It's hard to beat the Flash IDE for ease-of-use, and I imagine their new HTML-based product(s) will be the same.

[0] https://www.adobe.com/products/flashplatformruntimes/statist... [1]: http://students.autodesk.com/?nd=download_center

lloeki• 14 years ago

> 99% market penetration

By that metric, Java has 73%, but I basically never encounter a Java applet on the web (except when digitally signing my taxes) and increasingly hardly any Flash.

sparknlaunch122• 14 years ago

Oh, wasn't aware flash is now supported on apple products.

My comments were referring to the shift away from flash. Penetration in a constricting market is not ideal.

coob• 14 years ago

99% market penetration is a bullshit statistic, it completely ignores mobile which is the fastest growing method for accessing the web.

rimantas2• 14 years ago

  >  99% market penetration[0] is not losing.

Let's talk about trends: what is the outlook for web browsing on smartphones and tablets? How big part of these support Flash? What part of those supporting flash actually have it enabled?

IE had 98% marketshare once too…

novalis• 14 years ago

Flex on iOS and Android kind of not making it a loss for Flash at the moment. Just check top rated games on those app stores.

chris_wot• 14 years ago

Doesn't this work on Firefox? It has Canary, IE10 developer preview, Chrome and Webkit builds... no Mozilla!

TazeTSchnitzel2• 14 years ago

Gecko seems to be behind on a lot of things lately... it took until FF11 for them to support the loop attribute on audio tags(!)

dcurtis2• 14 years ago

If you're not a designer, it might be hard to see, but the importance of this work is impossible to overstate. In 10 years, we'll look back on today and think about how barbaric and stupid it was that we didn't have re-flowable text in multi-box CSS layouts or absolute control of typefaces on the web.

I have come upon the edge of what CSS is capable of multiple times, especially when building http://dustincurtis.com, and what happened surprised me: after a while, I noticed that I had started to subconsciously alter my designs to fit within the limitations of the display technology. As I realized that the only sane way to build the layouts was to absolutely/manually position every paragraph, I slowly stopped writing and designing the articles. It was just too much work because the tools to do great custom layouts on the web just don't exist.

Compared to what should be possible by now, CSS is pretty primitive. It's a limiting factor in the digitization of traditional media, like magazines. What Adobe is doing here is awesome, and I commend them for pushing forward the status quo.

kirillzubovsky2• 14 years ago

I am with Dustin on this one, but from a different angle. By creating flowable text, Adobe will ridiculously enhance the usefulness of their current publishing tools. A few years back I dabbled into newspaper publishing, and you can't imagine just how frustrating it is to have a beautiful layout in InDesign, which isn't really portable to the web. Having these tools will allow 'normal' people who don't do web to easily create stunning experience; that is a big undertaking!

DanBC4• 14 years ago

> to easily create stunning experience

I know that I've lost this battle and that I'm in a minority, but to me "stunning experience" comes from the content, and not the presentation.

gbog2• 14 years ago

> the only sane way to build the layouts was to absolutely/manually position every paragraph

To me, this looks like the most INsane way to build a layout. What is wrong with a "let browsers and users choose their font size, their text widht, etc."?

For instance, both my wife and I are Kindle users, we have different font size, the text reflows almost always correctly, and who prefers bigger font has bigger font. My father is also a Kindle user and use an even bigger font because of his age. Soon he will have to read book on this device, because all fixed-font books will be too small for him.

EmilStenstrom• 14 years ago

There are two big "design movements" on the web, and dustin represents one end of the spectrum. His side argues that great design makes things better, and that we all should put more time into design.

The other side says "design is not needed", and that each user can manage their design settings themselves. These are the people that pushed for RSS and Responsive design, and that see design as more of an optional addon.

None of the sides are always correct.

thristian• 14 years ago

> after a while, I noticed that I had started to subconsciously alter my designs to fit within the limitations of the display technology.

Isn't that what always happens? That's one of the reasons designs from different eras look different: not just that fashions change, but that the output technology changes and allows a different set of design choices. No matter how much somebody in the 1940s might have wished to set some type a smidgeon wider or narrower, that just wasn't possible until the advent of phototypesetting in the 60s, and 1940s designers would have subconsciously altered their designs to fit within the limitations of their technology.

dcurtis2• 14 years ago

At the fringes of every fashion era, there have been things that've peeked out into the future and tried to push things forward.

As a designer, if you aren't constantly trying to build stuff that's better than what other people think is currently possible, then you may have just become a cog in a machine.

qznc• 14 years ago

I agree that this technology is absolutely necessary for certain use cases.

However, this will certainly be abused by lots of people to create "an amazing experience online", with the effect that texts become harder to read.

nostromo• 14 years ago

> In 10 years, we'll look back on today and think about how barbaric and stupid it was that we didn't have re-flowable text in multi-box CSS layouts or absolute control of typefaces on the web.

I believe that's the purpose of this W3C Candidate Recommendation: http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-multicol/

I agree that it seems silly that we still don't have columns in html, especially considering how wide monitors have gotten.

However, I'm not Adobe has the answer.

diminish• 14 years ago

CSS column flow will help a lot. However I hope print-minded-fixed designers will not end up flooding the net with rigid fixed-width designs mainly accessibility, edit ability, customisability is important in the word of flexible contents. papers or older forms of fixed rigid tech mediums have so many drawbacks, which ended up being a long exploitation area for designer hacks. in short I am for css-reflowing columns but i am against paper.

haberman• 14 years ago

I'm very cross with Adobe for forcing me to install Adobe Reader today. Makes it hard for me to have any interest in their new ideas.

https://plus.google.com/108917965951523281393/posts/MJqS8pF7...

aw3c2• 14 years ago

Reply to the sender that this is not acceptable.

salmanapk• 14 years ago

Already seen few sites abusing CSS Regions and making paragraphs harder to read. PLEASE use them wisely.

marathe• 14 years ago

Anyone else noticed that this move comes a week shy of the two-year anniversary of Steve Jobs's infamous open letter? (http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/)

"New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win on mobile devices (and PCs too). Perhaps Adobe should focus more on creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple for leaving the past behind."

Write-up here: http://webdev360.com/adobe-lays-cards-on-table-with-standard...

donteflon2• 14 years ago

Let's leave the Steve Jobs PR bullshit out of this. When it comes to Web Standards, Adobe was on the bandwagon before Apple even knew such a thing existed. For example, before any browser had support for SVG, Adobe Illustrator could export SVGs, and Adobe wrote and distributed for free a plugin that made SVG available in all the major browsers (IE, Mozilla, Opera and Safari). After it acquired Macromedia, Adobe finished and made open source the first VM with a JIT for ECMA script and donated it to Mozilla, it also licensed Opera's HTML/CSS rendering engine (by far the most standards compliant at the time, KHTML/WebKit was not around) and put it into Dreamweaver. Most of Adobe's products use JavaScript as the default scripting engine since a long long time ago (close to a decade by now), and it goes on, and on. Yet in the Steve Jobs distortion field, it's actually good ol' Apple who are twisting Adobe's hand to join the Web Standards movement. Hilarious, especially since it's the same Apple who had for years an obsolete, nonconforming, slow browser that was dead last in performance and implementation of Web Standards, so much so that Zeldman, in his "Designing with Web Standards" recommends IE 5 for Mac over Safari. Imagine that, for years (until Apple forked KHTML and KJS from KDE), the best browser running on Macs was made by Microsoft.

mturmon• 14 years ago

I don't seen the point of the venom in your reply.

In fact, the Jobs letter that the grandfather comment mentions, recognized Adobe's historical contributions to publishing and graphics.

Here are its first sentences:

"Apple has a long relationship with Adobe. In fact, we met Adobe’s founders when they were in their proverbial garage. Apple was their first big customer, adopting their Postscript language for our new Laserwriter printer. Apple invested in Adobe and owned around 20% of the company for many years. The two companies worked closely together to pioneer desktop publishing and there were many good times."

You may disagree with Jobs' conclusions, or dislike Apple for various reasons, but the letter shows considerable insight.

thirdsun• 14 years ago

I hope this will be relevant for Adobe's Digital Magazine Distribution Suite - I'm really tired of waiting for new New Yorker issues to download on my ancient 1 MBit connection (rural area in germany). There's no need to provide text as a bunch of huge images resulting in several 100 MBytes in size.

crazygringo• 14 years ago

This may be off-topic, but progress with CSS (flowable text, etc.) is not only glacially slow, but we're still stuck with the terribly-designed CSS standard.

I find myself wishing for some kind of "layout bytecode" -- basically, machine-readable instructions which would size every element in a browser's page using custom layout algorithms that would depend on the size of the page and the size of font glyphs.

CSS would be compiled into this bytecode, but we'd be open to inventing new and better style languages which could be compiled as well. So we could create layout languages based on columns instead of floats, for example.

If this were actually implemented in newer browsers, it could actually be emulated in older browsers using JS libraries (although it would be much slower).

Note that this really only has to do with the layout properties of CSS. Things like color, rounded corners, drop shadows -- all that would still be implemented traditionally, but these aren't generally what people have problems with. It's the terrible layout algorithms of CSS which generate endless headaches.

alexchamberlain2• 14 years ago

Anybody got a useful example of reflowable text? On my large screen, a lot the boxes are just empty.

cfqycwz• 14 years ago

I'd suggest resizing the window.

alexchamberlain2• 14 years ago

I did to see the example work, but my point was that by default this gives a bad UX.

Adobe & HTML

Related Stories