Frederic de Villamil wrote:
interface.
Well, as luck would have it I recently did a ton of research on what’s
out there. If anyone’s interested in adding WYSIWYG editing, I’d
strongly recommend taking a look at FCKeditor.
Key features:
-
Works in Firefox & IE, Safari is being investigated
-
LGPL license
-
No plugins required
-
XHTML and CSS support
-
Can be configured to actually produce paragraphs and linebreaks
properly
The last feature is surprisingly rare; in fact, FCKeditor was the only
free WYSIWYG HTML editor I could find that could be configured to make
proper paragraphs under both IE and Firefox.
URL:http://www.fckeditor.net/
mathew
On Fri, 2006-07-21 at 10:10 +1000, Trejkaz wrote:
Can you not use an external application with WYSIWYG support, to post to the
blog? That’s what the API is for, after all. Might as well throw away the
API if nobody uses it.
A writer is not always at home or at a place where they can use a
desktop client when they want to post something, but are always near a
web browser. It is really frustrating to use the interface as it is now,
having to do
's and
's or whatever manually. It’s not beyond my
abilities but it’s the last thing I want to deal with when composing an
article. I might as well be inserting the entry with phpMyAdmin.
-Wade
On Friday 21 July 2006 01:52, Wade M. wrote:
On Thu, 2006-07-20 at 17:14 +0200, Frederic de Villamil wrote:
I’ve already started to re think the whole stuff from scratch, but I’m
really looking forward your ideas.
Would a WYSIWYG post editor be out of the question?
Can you not use an external application with WYSIWYG support, to post to
the
blog? That’s what the API is for, after all. Might as well throw away
the
API if nobody uses it.
TX
On Thu, 2006-07-20 at 17:33 -0700, Scott L. wrote:
Frankly, if you’re inserting
and
by hand, then you’re using
the wrong text filter.
Indeed I was. 
Maybe their effects should be made a bit more clear in setup.
-Wade
On 7/20/06, Wade M. [email protected] wrote:
article. I might as well be inserting the entry with phpMyAdmin.
Frankly, if you’re inserting
and
by hand, then you’re using
the wrong text filter.
Scott
Scott L. a écrit :
article. I might as well be inserting the entry with phpMyAdmin.
Frankly, if you’re inserting
and
by hand, then you’re using
the wrong text filter.
Scott
Or maybe the text filters were brocken and no one was able to use them
don’t you think ? 
–
Frédéric de Villamil
“Quand tu veux chasser une belle fille, il vaut mieux commencer par
draguer sa copine moche” – précepte de go.
http://t37.net http://fredericdevillamil.com
[email protected] tel: +33 (0)6 62 19 1337
A WYSIWYG editor doesn’t belong in the admin interface. The current
editor
is more than adequate for the purpose it should be used for – to allow
the
administrator to edit posts as necessary. The reasons for allowing
admins to
post new entries from the admin interface are arguable.
It would make much more sense for themes to offer a post editor from the
front page if the user’s session is active (ie, by checking that the
log-in
cookie exists and hasn’t expired) the way many themes currently offer
‘edit’/‘nuke’ options on comments if the user is an admin. Maybe that’s
not
something that’s going to happen right now, but even in the worst case,
post
editors should be prime candidates for being broken into plugins (once
the
refactoring work Scott mentioned happens).
Anyway, Frederic best of luck to you on this, it’s going to be awesome
I’m
sure. A cleaner admin interface will be great, regardless of whether it
includes WYSIWYG support.
(BTW, anyone who hasn’t checked out the Firefox blogging extension from
http://www.performancing.com should – it’s quite nice and unintrusive.
I’m
not as happy with it as I used to be, because posting with it makes Typo
return an error message about not being able to update the categories
table…apparently because the some column is marked as unique.)
Cheers,
Syed
Can you not use an external application with WYSIWYG support, to post
article. I might as well be inserting the entry with phpMyAdmin.
–
Frédéric de Villamil
“Quand tu veux chasser une belle fille, il vaut mieux commencer par
draguer sa copine moche” – précepte de go.
http://t37.net
http://fredericdevillamil.com
But surely those couple hundred lines would be useful for more than just
the
WYSIWYG editor. Custom spam handlers? Maybe an rss2email-type
tool…there
are a bunch of non-essential features that could be bundled like that.
Anyway, my point was more that fancy editors simply don’t belong in the
admin interface. The two big problems with the current interface are
that a)
it’s monolithic and b) it covers a lot of functionality. I’d almost
argue
that the ‘settings’ page is the only thing that belongs in the admin
interface. Everything else (categories, articles, feedback) is more of a
blog-owner interface. When multi-blog Typo happens, this blog-owner
interface will need to be per-blog, which will underscore this point.
Plug-ins are good, and might actually help keep Typo lean and clean.
Uzair
On 7/20/06, Scott B. [email protected] wrote:
than mine?
- Scott
I’ve implemented TinyMCE for a production system, and Safari and Opera
8 are horribly broken in it. In my case, we just detect safari and
fall back to a text area, which isn’t nice but its better then an
editor that has a lot of buttons that don’t work. The worst part is
that TinyMCE is about the best open source option for browser support
- Dojo, FCKEditor, and others are all the same or worse.
Safari is just broke regarding the rich text stuff, but its getting
better in the Web Kit nightlies.
On 7/20/06, mathew [email protected] wrote:
when compaired to the amount of users Typo should gain with a wysiwyg
URL:http://www.fckeditor.net/
mathew
Just another data point: TinyMCE has XHTML and “tidy” code support,
and the source is decent and fairly easy to follow. I’ve heard
reports that the fckeditor source is pretty bad, though I haven’t
looked myself after seeing how well Tiny worked. The TIny devs also
were submitting tickets to Web Kit to try and help out with Safari
support, though that seemed to have stalled last time I checked the
tickets.
Here’s the thing: adding an interface for plugins for the admin
interface would probably take a couple hundred lines of code, by the
time we turn the current interface into a plugin, add an extra sample
or two, and then test the whole thing. Adding one rich-text editor as
a standard option would cost maybe 10 lines of code. In total. One
admin setting to enable it, and a couple lines that change the HTML
generated and load the right .js file.
So, maybe it’s a good usability move, maybe it isn’t, but complaining
that it’d make Typo too complex and it should be a plugable option is
almost exactly backwards :-).
Scott