Textpattern CMS support forum
You are not logged in. Register | Login | Help
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#16 2015-10-16 08:44:35
- Algaris
- Member
- From: England
- Registered: 2006-01-27
- Posts: 607
Re: Improved Text Editor Capability
Bloke wrote #295827:
I don’t think I’ve found one that writes decent HTML yet and allows hassle-free editing after the fact (though maybe I’ve not looked hard enough). Baffles me how TinyMCE is so popular.
philwareham wrote #295843:
From my experience with full HTML generators (such as CKEditor), they produce some pretty nasty HTML sometimes (such as empty divs and spans and inline styling). I would not be keen on that kind of editor at all.
I completely agree with both of you. Every HTML editor I’ve used produces a spaghetti mess when you switch to HTML view. I’m using the Atto text editor for my works Moodle. It’s far better than TinyMCE but even copy and pasting text within the editor results in a mass of spans and inline styles.
Whichever editor you chosen I’d prefer one that produces clean code/markup without adding to or changing my formatting.
Last edited by Algaris (2015-10-16 09:03:10)
Offline
Re: Improved Text Editor Capability
Markdown won
in the web, there is no victory. Just phenomenon and trend.
Offline
Re: Improved Text Editor Capability
sacripant wrote #295845:
in the web, there is no victory. Just phenomenon and trend.
Well said sir, well said.
We Love TXP . TXP Themes . TXP Tags . TXP Planet . TXP Make
Offline
Re: Improved Text Editor Capability
A link to a older discussion with same question and some good reflections: Improvements to editor
Offline
Re: Improved Text Editor Capability
Just released from Basecamp – Trix looks interesting.
Offline
Re: Improved Text Editor Capability
jstubbs wrote #296043:
Just released from Basecamp – Trix looks interesting.
Then you end up at CoffeeScript, if only cloning were possible.
Trix is pretty cool, it’s a different breed of web editor, very powerful.
Went through the example, did a quick index.html with trix in it. Fired it up and starting entering text, then I kept going down the Readme and it says drag and drop, so I dragged an image file from my file manager on top of the editor, voila, there it is.
Definitely should be checked out further.
We Love TXP . TXP Themes . TXP Tags . TXP Planet . TXP Make
Offline
Re: Improved Text Editor Capability
Trix is already on my radar
Offline
Re: Improved Text Editor Capability
Is it possible to ship with 3 and give the admin a choice of which to use: markdown / textile / wysiwyg – or would you call this Bloatware?
It seems there are 3 schools of thought on the subject – why not please all?
95% of my clients/customers want wysiwyg – because they are small business and do not want to learn a new skill – they want word unfortunately so they can update there website and feel all warm and cosy doing it :) You have to remember they might only update once a week / month.
I have 5% of clients using rah_textile_bar… they aren’t too comfy with textile… but use it – but then when it comes to inserting an image… it all goes pear shaped.
Which ever we choose there has to be an integration with the image library… hak_tinymce was great at this.
IMO – the lack of a decent core WYSIWYG editor in txp, regardless of code output, is one of the reasons that other CMS systems are ahead of txp in popularity.
Offline
Re: Improved Text Editor Capability
tye wrote #296063:
IMO – the lack of a decent core WYSIWYG editor in txp, regardless of code output, is one of the reasons that other CMS systems are ahead of txp in popularity.
That’s not wrong. In fact, for Textile, we already have rah_textile_bar which can be in the core. This plugin is very clean and easy to use. I customized it easily to make a markdown bar you can try (I just changed formating inserts for now). We could probably improve that with a pref switching between Textile and Markdown in the same plugin. We could also add highlighting things off course but it probably won’t take Txp to a very larger audience. If we want more users, I’m afraid that Tye is true: a WYSIWYG editor is required.
Edit: The WYSIWYG editor could be a plugin but it must exist.
Last edited by NicolasGraph (2015-10-21 10:03:37)
Offline
Re: Improved Text Editor Capability
NicolasGraph wrote #296080:
If we want more users, I’m afraid that Tye is true: a WYSIWYG editor is required.
and is actually easier to implement that a syntax highlighter. But we already have hak_tinymce, right? It can be replaced with some more sexy contenteditable editor.
Offline
Offline
Re: Improved Text Editor Capability
NicolasGraph wrote #296085:
How is that for something sexiest but still light?
Looks good! The only problem I see is that <txp:tag /> are transformed into <txp:tag />, but a normal user shouldn’t need tags in articles anyway. Something must be doable, but more as a general interface to plug wysiwyg editors.
Edit: what I really really think is that it could be part of admin-side themes.
Last edited by etc (2015-10-21 14:40:20)
Offline
Re: Improved Text Editor Capability
etc wrote #296086:
Looks good! The only problem I see is that
<txp:tag />are transformed into<txp:tag />, but a normal user shouldn’t need tags in articles anyway.
I can’t remember if it’s possible to use <txp:tags /> in hak_tinymce. You are probably right when you say that a normal user shouldn’t need tags in articles anyway. On my side I still add figures in the article body with <txp:images /> but it is maybe not a common behaviour.
Offline
Re: Improved Text Editor Capability
NicolasGraph wrote #296087:
On my side I still add figures in the article body with
<txp:images />but it is maybe not a common behaviour.
Although I use the <txp:image id="##" /> I do it too. It’s one thing i find easier and more flexible than the textile equivalent.
Yiannis
——————————
NeMe | hblack.art | EMAP | A Sea change | Toolkit of Care
I do my best editing after I click on the submit button.
Offline
Re: Improved Text Editor Capability
Just putting this back on the radar
Not sure if it has any value for us, but it’s a nice thing.
Offline