Bootstrap-based but accessible template (WCAG 2.0 compliant) [closed] - twitter-bootstrap-3

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
I am building an admin style, data-driven, internal business application (as opposed to a public facing website). I'd like to use a Bootstrap based template (even considering for-purchase templates from a Bootstrap marketplace or something), but the key requirement is that the site must be accessible (WCAG 2.0 AA compliant).
I know Bootstrap has had some accessibility issues (some colors, some javascript, etc.), but I also know that a lot of that has been getting better as newer versions were getting released. Bootstrap documentation itself offers only a small section on Accessibility and no mention of WCAG 2.0. Does anyone know what the latest status is for accessibility and Bootstrap (ver 3.3.7 at the moment)?
I've also come across Accessible+, which is a Bootstrap-based template, but I'm not sure whether the design fits well for the application I'm building, as it seems more public-facing (product/sales based). But it might work.
Alternatively, does anyone have any other Bootstrap based templates to recommend (free or not) which would work well for my need here, while also being very accessible?

I develop and maintain custom bootstrap websites that emphasize WCAG 2.0 AA compliance, but I'm looking for a good Bootstrap based template from which I can develop smaller projects without investing the time for a custom project.
One thing I'm noticing is that the few templates and themes out there advertising as WCAG 2.0 AA / 508 Compliant are NOT actually compliant, including Accessible+. Using the online WebAIM tool on their template it's registering 8 WCAG 2.0 AA coding errors, 16 alerts, and 4 contrast errors on the front page.
The WebAIM online tool is just a starting point, even getting zero errors on the tool does not make a site "compliant" there is no such thing as a "compliant" website ... the criteria is subjective. There are less and compliant and more compliant sites.
Validating with the WebAIM tool does definitely make a site more compliant. To get any sort of certification that a site is compliant actual lab testing by individuals with disabilities is required. Even then, a site can get a certification from the third party that does the testing, there is no universal compliance stamp that the Dept of Justice would refer to if a complaint was filed for a site.
Another thing I've found is that one needs to be careful about what third party to use for a certification of a site. Some are very expensive and do not necessarily have much credibility. The non-profit WebAIM program at Utah State University is one of the most credible and reasonably priced. Their site also offers some of the best overall information about web accessorily and compliance. Note, I have no affiliation whatsoever with that organization other than attending training there.

I'm in the same situation. I'm not sure about how the accesibility of Bootstrap has been improved since the 3.1.1. version.
I also saw the Accessible+ template, but it has been not updated since January, and I'm not sure if can fit what I need, so paying for it will be my last option.
These were my two main options:
Assets CMS GOV Framework. Its a modification of Bootstrap 3.1.1 with accesibility improvements to acomplish with the section 508 compliance (kind of USA govern alternative to WCGA 2.0, but a little less restrictive than WCGA AA). You can find it here http://assets.cms.gov/resources/framework/3.4.1/Pages/ the problem is that the package is just a bunch of folders with different scripts, styles, etc and I don't know where to start. I took a look to a previous version of the framework http://assets.cms.gov/resources/framework/2.0/Pages/ which was based on Bootstrap 2 and those files seems more like the kind of content I was expecting to find when I download it. So... after a couple of hours thinking if all those folders in the package wehere modificated, or where the originals and how to start, I declined about it... Maybe you can see it more clear.
The other option, which I'm starting to use, is the current Bootstrap version, with the Paypal Bootstrap plugin for accesibility https://github.com/paypal/bootstrap-accessibility-plugin. This seems more clear for me to figure out how to use, but is from 2 years ago and I don't have too much hope about it.
Anyway... both options are from a couple of years ago. I spent two days searching for anything else but seems that nobody cares a lot about accessibility nowadays. Several changes in accesibility have been implemented on Bootstrap since 3.1.1 but I think still can be far from be ready for a WCAG 2.0 AA.
In Bootstrap 4 beta seems to be more accesibillity improvements, but I don't know if they are enough to accomplish the WCAG 2.0 AA standards.
It will be good to know if you find something interesting!!

Disclaimer: I am the author of Accessible+ accessible bootstrap template as linked here by the question opener.
Accessible+ is in fact based on ASSETS which is based on Bootstrap.
I developed it because there were no Bootstrap accessible options available.
The main purpose was a regular template for "non-admin" websites.
Since I did not get overwhelming requests for doing an Admin template version, I never took the time to design one. But - I might in the future.
In any case, I can offer personal customization, even if you ask me to just make you a general "skeleton" for admin side.
Thanks for choosing to buy the template, I know it doesn't suit your needs 100% and I hope you succeed in converting it the way you need.

I was searching as well in the past for an accessible Bootstrap 4 template but found nothing. The ones I found failed in most accessibility tests.
Recently though, I searched again and found the "Labinator A11y-Bootstrap" template. It is basically an accessible Bootstrap 4 premium template that satisfies the WCAG 2.1 Level AAA guidelines. It also comes with an accessibility toolbar.
If you need though a free template and have good coding knowledge, then any modern Bootstrap 4 template can be made accessible with proper expertise in web development and accessibility. You can start by reading the official accessibility page of Bootstrap at (https://getbootstrap.com/docs/4.4/getting-started/accessibility/) then familiarize yourself with the WCAG 2.1 Level AA/AAA guidelines. There are some helpful checklists for those online, especially at the official website of WCAG.
Thereafter, you have to test your template with several web accessibility tools and verify the results manually. Two good tools are AChecker.ca and wave.webaim.org. Please note that all current web accessibility tools are not perfectly accurate - take them with a grain of salt. They can serve as a good pointer in the right direction rather than an ultimate guide.
It is good to note as well that Bootstrap 4+ is much better in terms of accessibility than Bootstrap 3+. As a full-time web developer working in the field, I would never pick Bootstrap 3+ or any template based on it when we have the modern Bootstrap 4.
I hope that helps!

Related

CK Editor 5 Versus 4 for New User

I have a more generic question. We want to install an editor in our application to allow teachers to teach others through learning posts. In order to accomplish this we plan to start with the classic ckeditor5 and then customize it to allow certain users to add things like science and math formulas, slide show presentations, etc.
Are we too early for this with CKE5? Should we stick with CKE4 and use the variety of plug-ins that are offered out of the box.
I just want to make sure CKE5 is ready for prime time.
Thanks so much for your response.
Ckeditor4 pros:
A lot of plugins available and easy to create custom plugin
UI customisation easy
A lot of pre-build skins available including Microsoft word 2013
Custom build can be easily made with online builder
CKeditor4 cons:
Difficult to implement with frameworks like react. Has to be implemented by creation script elements and appending to the DOM.
CKeditor5 pros:
Direct implementation with react possible with rpm packages.
Basic UI and toolbar looks a little better than ck4
CKeditor cons:
Very Less plugins available.
Plugins need to be installed as packages
UI customisation difficult
From Which editor is best:
The choice between the editors depends on the user’s specific needs
and requirements.
You should consider continuing using CKEditor 4 if the compatibility
with old browsers is a must for you or if features that are essential
for you are not yet available in CKEditor 5. However, being a totally
new editor, with time CKEditor 5 will have more and more features
developed and available for end users to benefit from. At the same
time, we are determined to continue the CKEditor 4 development and
maintenance for some good time still. The CKEditor 4.x line is under a
“Long Term Support” (LTS) programme which means that its development
and support is guaranteed until 2023, giving the users enough time to
make a move towards CKEditor 5.
If great user experience and clean UI are your priority and the
features currently available with CKEditor 5 Builds (Classic editor,
Inline editor, Balloon editor, Document editor) are sufficient for
your use case, then you should consider using CKEditor 5 Builds.
To find out more about CKEditor 5 Builds refer to the CKEditor 5 Builds documentation.
If you wish to create your own text editing solution and have full
control over every aspect of the editor, from UI to features, and the
possibility to enable real-time collaborative editing inside the
editor you should consider CKEditor 5 Framework.
To find out more about CKEditor 5 Framework refer to the CKEditor 5 Framework documentation.
From How to migrate from CKEditor 4 to CKEditor 5:
When compared to its predecessor, CKEditor 5 should be considered a
totally new editor. Every single aspect of it was redesigned — from
installation, to integration, to features, to its data model, and
finally to its API. Therefore, moving applications using a previous
CKEditor version to version 5 cannot be simply called an "upgrade". It
is something bigger, so the "migration" term fits better.
CKEditor 5's architecture and custom data model makes it possible to enable real-time collaborative editing.
In 2019 Chris Harris wrote this comment:
We have been using CKEditor 4 for some years, and since support is to
be dropped soon, I have just spent several days working on migrating
to CKEditor 5. This has been a frustrating experience, and as a
result, we will probably be moving to some other alternative instead.
My frustrations with CKEditor 5 include:
There are few features by default, and every new feature needs a different plugin, each one needing research and time to add in.
Adding plugins is not a simple download/install. Each one needs editing the main build config file, doing a rebuild, working out the
config we want, putting it in the build config file, building again.
None of which is difficult, but certainly more hassle than I would
expect.
CKeditor 4 had a re-sizeable window, CKEditor 5 doesn't. Adding CSS3 resizeable works, but had some odd effects when changing focus
from the editor to the page outside it (the window would resize to its
default size). I'm not saying that's the fault of CKEditor 5, but it's
another example where bringing it up to 4 level is not simple.
CKeditor 4 used inline element styling for e.g. floating an image left/right. CKEditor 5 doesn't, it adds a class to the element. So the
code produced by the editor doesn't work right without additional
styling, which adds complication to the deployment of the code it
produces.
My research suggests I'm not the only one who would like a simple
download that provided the same functionality as CKEditor 4, but it's
not available - by design. And I've come to the conclusion that the
design of CKeditor 5 has been driven ideologically, providing
something that the creators think developers ought to want - rather
than something they really do want.
See more on:
What is different about CKEditor 5 compared to CKEditor 4?
CKEditor FAQ
Migration from CKEditor
Bringing collaborative editing to any application

TideSDK tutorial? [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Is there an actual TideSDK tutorial that is not a remnant of the old Titanium Desktop? I can't seem to locate any clear tutorial that outlines coding to testing to building on TideSDK. Most of the things I've seen are intended to be used for the late Titanium Desktop. If anyone can outline the app creation process of TideSDK, it would be more than welcome. (E.g. Code, compile test? / Code, test, compile?)
Downloads from the TideSDK.org site currently provide Titanium Desktop 1.2.0.RC4 in the interim while the TideSDK Team continues to prepare for the upcoming 1.3.0-beta release (that is expected quite soon). Therefore, the legacy documentation from Appcelerator can still be used for getting you started on your desktop projects today. If you run into any issues there are friendly people on our mailing list to help. The only change in the API for 1.3.0 will be the change in the namespace from 'Titanium' to 'Ti'. Please consider joining the TideSDK mailing list https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/tidesdk for assistance or follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/tidesdk to keep up to date on TideSDK news and announcements.
Keep in mind we've been working through a transition with the legacy code and materials. It is a significant effort to assemble a capable and dedicated team, work through the complex code base, set up continuous integration infrastructure and organize the efforts the team is currently engaged in. Our repository on Github has grown from a couple of repositories to 48 over the past few months. The team is continuing to clean and organize the code that we inherited from Appcelerator so that it is possible to build upon it for the future. We are also striving to become a non profit organization as funding to support the team of 16 programmers, developers and UI designers and for the infrastructure we need for such the project. This is an important key to our success for the future.
The TideSDK team has been putting substantial effort into high quality documentation under the direction of Christian Engel, our Developer Education Lead, in anticipation of the upcoming release. TideSDK's documentation consists of API docs together with a series of Guides. A Guide is focused on a particular topic. In some cases, Guides serve as focused tutorials. To view the documentation under development, visit the brand new tidesdk.org site (launched at the end of August 2012) and click on the docs button. In the short term, the effort has been on API docs and code examples. This effort will shift to Guides quite soon.
No new features will be added for the 1.3.0-beta release but it will provide updates to the underlying libraries. This will enable the SDK to compile and be used on OSX Lion, OSX Mountain Lion, Ubuntu 12.04 and Windows 7 and 8. Scripting language versions are being brought up to date also. Perhaps the most significant thing it will upgrade the WebKit to the lastest available. This will mean the most current HTML5 support available.
TideSDK-1.3.1-beta is available. Please use this the most recent version of TideSDK found here
http://tidesdk.org
and refer to the Getting Started Guide located at:
http://tidesdk.multipart.net/docs/user-dev/generated/#!/guide/getting_started

Ideal UI markup language

A friend of mine and I are looking to start a project looking into accessible user interface (for blind users) design. There are a number of projects making existing GUI's accessible by tagging them with audio information but we're looking to work from the ground up and actually take input from a ML and create an accessible application.
I'm trying to figure out what ML to use and am torn between three at the moment. The three I'm considering are XAML,MXML, and XUL. Currently, I'm leaning towards XUL because it's open but I was wondering if anyone could think of any pros/cons that I might be missing? I know that XAML is the most popular but does it do things that XUL can't? How similar are they?
I should add that whatever ML we end up using we will be extending the syntax so that we can provide additional information to the audio system.
I have already addressed this question to some extent here.
The pros/cons of XUL are:
it's open
it's cross platform
it's well established with a large community
it still basically has to be run in a browser that supports XUL (firefox)
one of the comments from my question stated that XUL is a bad choice because firefos is buggy
The pros/cons of XAML are:
it'll work on Windows/Mac
it has a well established drag-drop IDE (VS 2010) to create GUIs
it has a massive support community
it's closed source
it's a closed platform, IE. it not an open standard (not covered under ECMA like .NET and C#)
there are legal issues regarding the use on non microsoft/mac plagforms (see my post)
it requires either a browser with a the silverlight plug-in or the .NET framework to use it on the desktop
it's developed/controlled by MS. This isn't an attempt to troll. Seriously, look it up on google. There are a lot of people who are suspicious of MS's intent behind creating XAML and it has garnered a lot of negativity behind the platform. It might be worth taking into consideration.
The pros/cons of MXML:
it's cross platform
it's closed source
it runs on a closed platform
it requires adobe flash (which, a lot of people claim is a dying platform now that Apple is rejecting to support/allow it).
it requires a browser with a plug-in
Note: I can't really say much about MXML because this is the first time I've heard about it. I just pointed out the obvious pros/cons for completeness. I'll have to research it and add an entry to in the question I linked.
XUL application can be run under XUL Runner because after Firefox 4, remote XUL application execution within Firefox browser is prohibited

Migrating from Dojo 1.1.1 to Dojo 1.3/1.4

We are in mid of a project where we have used an extended Dojo 1.1.1 to meet the customer requirement and add richness.
But there are quite some bugs and performance problems with this version of Dojo and
we are looking ahead to migrate the Dojo version to overcome both the issues, but the migration cycle seems to be quite painful and may not be yield expected result.
The concern we have is with the various extension which we have created with the version of Dojo for components that were provided in 1.1.1 and the impact on them after migration.But, the advantage we see are equally important.
As per Dojo , they have kept some level of compatibility with version 1.1.1 but i have not seen any discussion around this anywhere.
Has any body else previously done
migrated between Dojo version?
Will the components like Grid will
work as expected or will i need to
carry out a refactoring exercise?
Do we have any commercial support
available as the forum seems to
deprecated?
Any help or suggestions are welcome
Dojo has had a policy of freezing and supporting public APIs since 1.0. Migrations prior to 1.0 were extremely painful. Now, it should be much better, provided you use only public APIs. Code written for stable JS APIs in Dojo or Dijit in 1.1 should largely still work. Exceptions are noted in the release notes, which you should explore (good luck finding them... unfortunately the site is a bit of a mess)
If you wrote any custom widgets, you're probably in for some extra work. dojox.grid was not particularly stable at that point, and it has also seen a major rewrite since then (there is an old 'compat' layer you may wish to use)
Regarding for forum, like the note says, you can either use the active dojo-interest mailing list or post questions here at SO. There are some firms which offer commercial support, but that's outside of the scope of Dojo as an open source project. (try googling 'Dojo commercial support' or asking on dojo-interest)
I have done 5 dojo migrations now (from 0.2 -> 1.4) over the last few years. Although the API does not change, you will often have coded in workarounds that no longer work after upgrading. Things I have noticed:
quality in 1.4 is VERY good and worth
upgrading to (even from 1.3)
although
the API does not change, little
things that are not public often
change slightly (diji.Tree
itemNodeMap -> itemNodesMap in 1.4)
build options are usually added each
release but not always publicised -
strage really as they are always
useful improvement
since you are 1.1.1, you should change all your set attribute calls to 'attr' - this could take a while to do.
As for commercial support, you could try Sitepen

Best IDE/Editor for ColdFusion? [closed]

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 11 years ago.
I am just starting at a job in which I will be using a lot of ColdFusion. What is the best IDE/Editor to use?
I'd like to provide my personal reasoning behind why you might choose any of these editors (at least the ones I'm familiar with). Just saying "use this, use that" is not at all helpful. To large degree, the question is wrong. There's rarely a "best IDE" for a language; rather, there are multiple environments, each suiting particular needs. Here goes:
1) Dreamweaver
Why you would use it: its history as a designer tool makes it much easier for "non-coder" types to start cranking out websites. If you're a solo developer building a lot of "Tom's Corner Store" type of sites, even if they require some CF Coding (mailing list, subscribers, current specials, light content management, etc), its design tools, "template" features, and ease-of-deployment (ftp) make it an attractive choice. It has good-enough code coloring and code completion for the built-in CF tags and functions. It can interrogate user-defined functions in the same page. It has excellent CSS support. You can find a wealth of extensions, too. It's pretty stable and, in my experience, hasn't been very "crashy". It will do a fair amount of code generation for you as well (whether that code is "good" is debatable). All in all Dreamweaver is incredible software for web site designers.
Why you wouldn't use it: It is not free, and it is certainly not a "coder's editor". While it provides for extensions, they're typically interface-focused (javascript validation, etc), unlike say Eclipse plugins, which can run the gamut. For large projects, it simply does not have the code navigation features that many coders come to expect. It's web-focused. So if you're a polyglot, or even just like to dabble in compiled languages (java, etc), then you'll need to keep another editor on hand for those tasks.... you won't be able to do it all in one place. ColdFusion unit testing support is nonexistent in Dreamweaver. There is no step debugging for ColdFusion.
2) CFEclipse plugged into Eclipse.
Why you'd use it: CFEclipse is going on 6 years old now and has matured significantly. It's been quite stable for the last few years and most crashiness has been due to Eclipse itself and not CFEclipse (which was not true in the early days). Recently CFEclipse has seen an infusion of fresh blood and features are being added to make coding in it even more productive. It contains a wealth of keyboard shortcuts, many of the toolbar features people love from ColdFusion Studio days, and Eclipse's in-built code navigation features (namely, Ctrl-Shift-R for finding files quickly).
It has content assist for native CF Tags and functions, and some support for in-page variables, though that's never worked all that well. It does not support in-page functions, nor does it provide native true component insight (i.e. insight into components that you write and use in other code). It will support component insight to some extent with Dictionaries, but even then, it requires a lot of work on the part of the dictionary creator. Most people find dictionaries too much work to maintain, in my experience.
The lastest version of CFEclipse contains the best CFML formatting you'll find.
For me, "method explorer" and "Snip Tree View" -- particularly keyboard shortcuts for inserting snippets -- have been big productivity boosters.
If you work with ColdSpring, ModelGlue, Mach-II, ColdBox, and other frameworks with xml configuration files, CFEclipse's Framework Explorer is brilliant.
Because it's a plugin to Eclipse, you can do everything else you'd want to do in Eclipse. You wanna code java? You can. You want webservice support? you got that. You want to do step debugging, you can do so with the free Adobe-provided extensions for Eclipse.
The large plugin ecosystem is one of the most attractive features of Eclipse, and you shouldn't discount this when deciding on an editor. For example, I would not want to work without Mylyn, which integrates with issue tracking and in my experience has transformed the way I work, much for the better.
Eclipse's version control system support is excellent as well. Subversion is well supported; there's a VSS plugin; and recently a git plugin (if not two) has been accepted into the Eclipse foundation so we'll see native git support very soon (you can get it now with a plugin).
Eclipse's ANT support is excellent.
You can easily plug the MXUnit Eclipse plugin into Eclipse for unit testing your CFML (full disclosure: I contribute to MXUnit).
Finally, I have full confidence that the folks working on CFEclipse -- Denny, Mark, Jim, Peter, et al. -- will continue to work toward keeping CFEclipse as the best open source CFML IDE available. These are some of the brightest minds in the ColdFusion community and are passionate about their mission. If you choose to use CFEclipse, you are not choosing to use an IDE that will be supplanted by ColdFusion Builder. This project is in good hands.
Why you wouldn't use it: it's a code IDE, not a design tool like Dreamweaver. It's not perfect... code assist can be too aggressive in its suggestions. Eclipse itself, especially when you pile it up with all kinds of plugins, can get unstable on lesser machines. Finally, people who don't like the "Project" view of the world often have complaints about it because they're used to working directly with the file system view of the world. Its deployment support is nowhere near as simple as Dreamweaver, though you can find plugins that get close.
3) ColdFusion Builder
Why you'd use it: all of what I said previously about Eclipse itself applies to CFBuilder when used as a plugin to Eclipse. I cannot speak to the Standalone version because as of this writing, it still doesn't support plugins very well. This will most surely be fixed by the time it is released, but I don't want to speculate on what the Standalone may or may not do.
One of CFBuilder's big draws is "Extensions". These are a way to plug in CFML code into your editor. It's hard to describe, so I'd suggest googling for "ColdFusion Builder Extensions", and you'll most likely be amazed. Adobe's Terry Ryan has created "Apptacular" for scaffolding applications from a database, and Brian Rinaldi has a series of posts on building CFBuilder extensions. These are huge and will prove themselves to be a developer's best friend after CFBuilder is released.
CFBuilder's deployment support is, in my opinion, on par with if not superior to Dreamweaver's.
CFBuilder does not require an additional plugin to do step debugging. Just hit the debug button and off you go.
CFBuilder contains true component insight, meaning that it can introspect components you write and provide ctrl-space content assist. It can be wonky, however, and does require some configuration. But please remember that as of now, CFBuilder is still in beta. My best guess is that it'll be at least a few versions until all the kinks are worked out of this feature. Still, it's a big productivity and learning booster to get content assist on your own components.
CFBuilder provides a "Servers" view for stopping/starting your CF Server. It's built on Aptana and so contains the Aptana "tail log" view, which is great for watching log files. Just like CFEclipse, it has a Snip Tree View.
The CFBuilder "vision" is led by Adobe's Adam Lehman. He's passionate about CF and is a force of nature. I have great hopes for CFBuilder because of Adam's leadership.
Why you wouldn't use it:
For one, it won't be free. Noone outside Adobe knows yet how much it will cost, however. "Extensions" and the deployment features alone may be worth the price. Time will tell.
Because it's an Adobe product, I think it's reasonable to assume that releases will come as frequently as most Adobe products, which means... not very often. While CFEclipse deploys rather frequently lately -- and makes available a "nightly" site for the brave -- CFBuilder will most likely not do such daring-do. CFEclipse can afford to make potentially unstable builds available to the public, while it is perhaps not in Adobe's best interests to do so with CFBuilder.
Finally, it's still in Beta and might not be released for some time. If you get it now and start using it, remember that. In my experience, debugging is wonky, content assist sometimes works, sometimes doesn't, and a lot of people have experience crashiness. It's free beta software... you're getting what you pay for. But know that the more you work with this beta release, and particularly if you provide feedback via the public bug database, the better off all of us will be if it provides a best of breed editor for CFML.
Personally:
At home, when I do "designer" work, I use Dreamweaver when I feel that its Templates will help me build a site as quickly as possible. For existing side projects which require maintenance coding and easy deployments, I use ColdFusion builder.
At work, where I do almost no design work, CFEclipse has been my IDE since 2006. I've begun using ColdFusion builder a lot, though currently I split my time between CFBuilder and CFEclipse. One reason is that as of this writing, CFEclipse is more stable (i.e. it doesn't crash and I don't lose work). I fully expect stability problems to be mitigated by the time CFBuilder costs money.
Both CFBuilder and CFEclipse have public bug databases. CFEclipse has a well-attended public mailing list, and if you have questions, you'll get answers quickly. I cannot yet speak to the speed with which CFBuilder questions are answered.
Finally, for "coders", it's my experience that once you invest the time in learning the tools and shortcuts, Eclipse provides superior productivity compared with designer tools like Dreamweaver. For cranking out a designed site, a designer tool like Dreamweaver confers significant advantages.
The answer to the best ColdFusion IDE isn't an answer, but a question: "What are you trying to do with ColdFusion?" The answer to that question will lead you to an IDE that suits your needs for a particular project. Different circumstances or projects may lead you to a different tool which better suits your needs.
Notepad++ with CF syntax highlighting.
For free: Eclipse with CFEclipes plugin
For cost: If you're a developer, use Coldfusion Builder, if you're a front end designer Dreamweaver edits Coldfusion pretty well. I use it quite often.
I have heavily used Dreamweaver, CFeclipse with eclipse and now Coldfusion Builder. What I found is this:
1) Dreamweaver is only good for the few times you have to do some wysiwyg wizardry. The newer versions do have SVN integration so you might be able to get away with using it. I did use it for a few years on windows.
2) CFEclipse + Eclipse - Generally the standard of what' sbeen used for a while. Runs well, once you add in the Adobe dictionary files and subclipse, you have a good environment
3) Coldfusion Builder - This is Adobe's version of CFeclipse. It's still pretty new and getting to later beta. I switched to it about 6 months ago and haven't looked back. It's got a lot of wizards, including the ability to write your own plugins in CFML that will run right inside CFbuilder. It's free right now on beta but will likely be pretty cheap like the first flex builder that came out.
My Choice: Coldfusion Builder. It doesn't mean the others aren't capable, but you'll spend the least amoutn of time getting setup and maintaining your plugins, etc.
Since I had paid for and used Dreamweaver for a lot of years (Eclipse was generally sluggish sometimes on PCs' a while back until the excess of ram + cpu today), spending to have an adobe maintained copy of eclipse is okay with me. The wizards available in CFbuilder, especially for flex are excellent.
Hope that helps, good luck and share what you ended up picking and why!
For anyone who might stumble here from Google, you should also take a look at Sublime Text coupled with the ColdFusion package.
If you are familiar with Eclipse I would recommend Eclipse with coldfusion plugin.
http://www.cfeclipse.org/
Some use Eclipse, some use ColdFusion Builder, some use emacs or TextMate or vim. I use vim.
It doesn't take much time to try out an IDE or editor. Give them all a shot and stick with the one you like most.
The best IDE is ColdFusion Builder. It allows RDS, In Line Debugging, Extensions (written in ColdFusion!), Code Generation, Refactoring, supports JavaScript, CSS and HTML and so much more. It is currently in beta and should be released in production sometime this year.
CFEclipse is a great IDE for CFML and is the right choice if you are writing CFML for the open source engines. It is free and like most open-source free products it can do almost anything Builder can do if you invest the time to install the additional plugins (like Aptana) and tweak your setup just right.
I use both. At work, we use Builder. At home, I use CFEclipse.
Welcome to the CFML community!
Notepad++. Light and easy to use.
I'll vote for jEdit. While it doesn't offer great ColdFusion support beyond syntax highlighting, and therefore probably isn't great for learning ColdFusion, its flexibility in working with other languages (which seems to happen fairly often while working on the web), powerful macros, plug-in support, proper text wrapping, and loads of other features, make it the editor to which I always end up returning after trying out the "next best thing".
CFEclipse appears to be the most popular. Adobe has a beta of ColdFusion Builder (also based on Eclipse) but when I tried it a few months ago it was still buggy.
Personally I use TextMate (OS X) a pretty bare bones text editor.
I have used textpad, for 6 years, still a solid app, provides syntax coloring/highlighting, regular expressions support. Can easily search inside any file, through tons of folders/subfolders.
Just a fast loading, easy to use, tool.
Also has macros, and macro programming...
http://www.texptad.com
I'd like to throw E TextEditor for the Windows users in here as well. Its similar to sublime but it does have its advantages. E is more or less Textmate for windows and will allow you to run the cftextmate bundles. In addition to being lightweight and extremely fast you get the huge Textmate community developing bundles, color schemes, and other community driven content.
Some of the highlights of E is that it will allow you to open a directory and treat it directory as a project. Hitting Shift-Ctrl T will allow you to browse all the files in your project in a flattened hierarchy which allows you to find files extremely fast.