|Hi Manuel! I read your article and frankly I don't agree *almost* at all..! Let me point a few things but obviously this is just my personal opinion.|
1. HTML viewing
Here you wrote about selecting a portion of the HTML and beautification.
Well, Firefox has the great option to view the source of the selected portion! Is a plus for FF and I would really like to see this in Chrome too but...
"the code of our sites has bugs, often it generates HTML code that is incorrect or even invalid." Well, I don't really think viewing the source in the browser is the best option for debbuging; I mean, incorrect code, invalid code are pointed in any decent IDE (NetBeans for example).
Also I don't see how can be useful to disable beautification to detect a malformed code. Again, any decent IDE...
2. HTML Validation
Web Developer by Chris Pederick -> https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/bfbameneiokkgbdmiekhjnmfkcnldhhm?hl=en has a completly functional validator even for local html, css! I use it's validator and never dissapointed.
You mention "can validate your pages even if you currently do not have Internet Access" but seriuosly! Who works with completely no internet access in a web development project?
"The only way to disable it in Chrome is going to preferences and disable it there. This is a real drag." I don't think this is an argument for *better for development* because 5 clicks (literally) to disable JS at Chrome vs 2 clicks of FF does not seem a big deal honestly.
4. Empty the browser cache
CTRL + SHIFT + SUPR and voilą! Faster than from an extension...
5. Switching the browser user agent identification
6. Buttons in the status bar (7, 10)
Well, this is personal taste again and not an argument most would consider for *better for development* and your points 7 and 10 maybe fit in this response too.
For point 8, never had that experience and 9 no opinion since I never test it, you may be right.
Please don't take my comment as rude because it is not the mood, as you said in your last paragraph just feeling free to post from my point of view.
||2. Re: In my opinion
|2011-05-19 21:13:10 - In reply to message 1 from Gilberto Ramos|
|I do not use an IDE. They usually make it more complicated to debug things.|
I need to see things working in real browsers and see what is being served to each browser, which may vary for some reason. Seeing everything in an IDE, is just like testing in a single browser and assume to all work well in other browsers.
As for the HTML validation, I mentioned that I tested all extensions for that available in the Chrome extensions site, including the Web Developer extension which I have installed.
It is not nearly as usable as Firefox extension which shows me the errors of all pages and inner frames just by dragging the mouse over the respective button in the status bar.
The output of W3C page does not come close to what the HTML validator extension of Firefox does. It is very easy to see which HTML tags you did not close.
It is also silly (and slow) that I need to send the HTML of my pages to another server every time I need to validate it.
Other than that, sometimes you need to travel and work in places outside your office where you do not have an Internet connection. Even when you work at your office, sometimes the ISP enters in maintenance mode, so you cannot do any Internet dependent work. My ISP does that a lot in the dawn, precisely when I am working on something important.
The Firefox HTML Validator extension works in the right way, there is no reason for Chrome to not have a similar extension. Maybe we need to sign a petition for the Firefox extension developer or Google to port it to Chrome.
But it is truly annoying when you need to do that frequently. Chrome developers did not sort that out probably because they were never told how annoying that is. That is the point of the article, hope that Chrome developers see these complaints and fix the problems ASAP.