Editors in Joomla! 1.6

[Hannes Papenberg]

Hi guys,
for quite some time I've been more or less annoyed about the editors
that we ship with Joomla. I personally don't like XStandard at all and I
also think that TinyMCE is way to heavyweight for most of us. (Which
does not mean that I want to get rid of TinyMCE. Its very much needed in
quite a lot of places.) At the same time we don't have a code editor
with real-time syntax highlighting, which would be very usefull for the
template manager.

This is why I'd like to propose to re-think which editors we ship with
Joomla. My proposal would be, to extend this from currently NoEditor and
TinyMCE to NoEditor, TinyMCE, a very simple, mootools based wysiwyg
editor and a syntax highlighting code editor.

A quick scan for a mootools wysiwyg editor brought this one up:
http://cheeaun.github.com/mooeditable/
MooEditable from Lim Chee Aun seems to be a pretty active project, it
has all the basic features that I would expect and guessing from their
mailinglist, I think they would be very open to suggestions from us.
Besides that, its awesomely lightweight.
(BTW: I'd like to use a mootools editor, since I don't want to load
mootools and a complete editor with JS framework and all. Slimming down
the size is the magic word. ;-) )

As I said, this has bothered me for some time already, which is why I
already wrote an editor-plugin for 1.5 for the code editor CodePress.
Unfortunately the CodePress project seems to be dead. The last update
has been done in 2007 and the ex-official domain codepress.org has been
captured by some domaingrabber. Thats why I looked a bit further and
talked to a few people and Tibor from the JBS told me about CodeMirror,
which is still active and seems to be even better than CodePress:
http://marijn.haverbeke.nl/codemirror/

I'd like to hear your opinions on this! :-)

Hannes

[Mark Dexter]

Hi Hannes. If we are re-thinking editors, is there a better default
for normal front-end editing than Tiny? It is challenging to try to
train end-users on editing, especially things like links and images.
JCE and WYSIWYG seem to do a better job than Tiny does in these areas.
Is it worth considering adding one of them (or a better end-user one
if it exists) as well? Thanks. Mark

[Hannes Papenberg]

JCE is something that I wouldn't really want to add, since it requires
another component and its more or less the opposite of lightweight. I'd
rather discuss using the lightweight Mootools editor as a default
instead of TinyMCE and if that is not enough for people, they can still
switch over to the big toys. :-)

Hannes

Mark Dexter schrieb:

[Rob Schley]

Another thing to look at would be the Wordpress editor. It is based on TinyMCE I think but it is much more lightweight and comparable to Mooeditable in terms of ease of use.

Rob

[Andrew Eddie]

Keep in mind that the TinyMCE editor we ship is way out of date. A
good starting point would be to simply upgrade it first. For me, I
personally prefer the variants based on the FCK editor. It's the
closest to the commercial WYSIWYG Pro that I've found. It also gives
me the most reliable results particularly when including code
snippets.

Regards,
Andrew Eddie
http://www.theartofjoomla.com - the art of becoming a Joomla developer




2009/5/25 Rob Schley <rob.s...@community.joomla.org>:

[Hannes Papenberg]

I updated TinyMCE to 3.2.4 today in the 1.6 trunk. Tibor is looking into
improving this even further. He is also working on upgrading the TinyMCE
in 1.5 to the current version.

Hannes

Andrew Eddie schrieb:

[Andrew Eddie]

Sounds good Hannes.

Regards,
Andrew Eddie
http://www.theartofjoomla.com - the art of becoming a Joomla developer

2009/5/25 Hannes Papenberg <hack...@googlemail.com>:

[G. D. Speer]

Finding consensus on Editors is an uphill task. That said,
I really like the idea of an ultralightweight frontend editor for users
designated as Authors.
The heavier weight editors risk pages becoming tag soup and carefully
constructed CSS
typography standards being trashed. I would encourage another alternative
being included
and mooeditable looks nicely clean.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.37/2131 - Release Date: 05/24/09
07:09:00

[Robert]

Hi, I have used mooeditable in one off my Joomla-Projects as an
alternative editor. It works pretty well and if we use 1.2 Mootools it
works also with screenreaders. I could make a editor plugin for 1.6 if
we all agree that we would wil have this editor in Joomla! 1.6.

Best Regards
Robert

[Gergő Erdősi]

Hi,

Personally I would like to see two editors in 1.6: TinyMCE 3 and No
Editor. I think these two are enough, if anyone needs an other editor
then he can download it from JED an install easily. In my opinion
there is no need to have 4 editors in the core (why?). I think TinyMCE
is a good choice because:
1. Its development is active.
2. Pretty good editor for general use.
3. Has localized translations.
4. Has a built-in compact version which offers a lightweight editor
for those who need just the basic features.

--
Gergő Erdősi



2009/5/25 Robert <rde...@googlemail.com>:

[elin]

Robert makes a good point. If you are running a site with lot of
users who are authors, you don't need a complex editor, but on the
other hand there are a lot of websites where most content is entered
in the back and there is little or no user generated content. For
them the issue of having a way to make internal links without having
to go grab the url is quite important. I tend to think that's better
as a plugin so the problem is solved cross editor, but it's a major
complaint of webmasters. Second, paste from Word. This was topic on
the mooeditable list recently (http://groups.google.com/group/
mooeditable/browse_thread/thread/5bc682ef002e2696) so it may be that
mooeditable. Third, hyphenation. Angie had a blog about the importance
of this in meeting accessibility standards in languages with long
words (http://jfoobar.org/blog/78-hyphenation-with-javascript.html)
and suggested http://code.google.com/p/hyphenator/ as a solution,
although it does not work in FF2.

I like mooeditable partly for the simplicity of the interface and
partly because it deals with the screenreader issues.

Elin

[Amy Stephen]

If we look at the editor situation, there are other issues that we might want to consider, including "How easy is it to add a button that will allow us to create dialog boxes to implement Content Plugin functionality?" If there is interest in adding an editor, let's start with a good list of critiera.

Also, there are dozens of good editors. I am looking at http://www.efectorelativo.net/laboratory/wysiwyg/ right now. Instead of evaluating one option, it would be good to figure out what all is available. (Arno has a nice start on an editor, too.)

In terms of Word markup, wouldn't it make more sense to explore improvements to Joomla!'s filtering so that all editor's (and form input) is covered? White list filtering will probably be needed since it will be tough to identify all the cryptic tags Microsoft might invent (and slow to search for a big list each time.)

Also, we need to consider usability when implementing a filtering strategy. To me, that's the bigger challenge -- helping people understand the issues, choices, and consequences without forcing an approach on them and then filling the forums with questions about "What happened to my flashing red font?"

We still have a lot of confusion and frustration from users since content global defaults were changed to require filters. Most responses instruct how users how to revert to pre-default filter state, rather than helping people learn about security issues, or Word markup problems.

For now, thinking about evaluation criteria and assembling a list of options for testing wouldn't hurt. If nothing else, it could help the third party developers begin to make options available for the community to explore. I think that exploration and learning will help identify an editor which works best for most people.

My 2 cents.
Amy

[Mark Dexter]

Just to clarify a point about pasting from Word documents. I think
that filtering is a different concept than converting from Word format
to HTML. Filtering just removes invalid or unwanted markup, whereas a
"paste from Word" feature converts (or tries to convert) MS Word
format to it's HTML equivalent. Obviously, this would only work if the
resulting HTML is not then filtered, but other than that they are I
think different concepts.

Thanks. Mark

[Amy Stephen]

Yes, I think you are right, Mark. I see that Tiny does some conversions from Word.

http://wiki.moxiecode.com/index.php/TinyMCE:Plugins/paste

I incorrectly thought there was only extra market. But, both problems are there.

I did a test with Tiny, and there is a lot of extra, invalid (confusing) markup that you really don't want. It probably has to be a combination of conversion (that the editor would do) and clean up of trash (which really is the filter's job.)

Thanks for that, Mark. I agree with your point.

[Jen Kramer McKibben]

Before we discuss the technology driving the editor, can we describe
required functionality first?

Can we also describe who the editor is for?

The editor is so critical to first impressions about Joomla. People
decide whether it's worth pursuing based on that editor and how easy
it is to put in and change content. That's developers AND clients, by
the way. Joomla has a reputation of being easy to use, but not as easy
as Wordpress. I think a lot of that has to do with the editor (and the
structure of the back end of the site). So it's really important to
get the editor right, particularly the default one, as it's not
immediately obvious that you can change the editor when you're first
working with Joomla.

Personally, I'm fine with "no editor" but my clients would completely
freak out.

My clients are generally capable of receiving/answering emails (but
sometimes need help setting up their accounts in Outlook or whatever),
writing documents in Word, surfing the web, etc. They have basic
computer skills, but they don't know and don't want to know HTML.
They just want to make some simple changes to some page or another, or
they want to create a new page by copying and pasting from Word.
Despite my best efforts, most use IE, generally version 6 or 7. The
version 6 users are typically at a university. Yes, I try to convert
them to Firefox, but they're generally not interested in learning a
new program. (I know, I know...)

So, some features for my clients (some of which have already been
mentioned):

- an easy way to copy/paste from Word, and then have that content take
on the formatting of the site. (From their perspective, they don't
understand why the text is in Times when the rest of the site is in
Arial.)

- an easy way to link to other locations on the site. That means being
able to browse to other pages on the site and link to them, not have
to copy/paste over the relevant URL.

- an easy way to insert an image. (The image button in J1.5 outside of
the editor does this really well.)

- an easy way to upload and link to a PDF document, preferably all in
one dialog box (as the image button does).

- an easy way to apply heading tags and styles.

From my perspective, what I want:

- when my client copies from Word, the code gets cleaned up so I don't
have to go back and do it myself when they complain that the font for
that article is Times and not Arial. (And of course, I'm confronted
with cleaning up 1000 lines of HTML where 10 would have been
sufficient.) Ideally, this is done BY DEFAULT when they paste so they
don't have to remember to click the Word button. (Azrul's MyBlog does
something like this when you paste, i.e. pops up a window for pasting,
and it reformats text if required.)

- foolproof ways to upload images and PDFs right from the link dialog
box, so they can accomplish these simple tasks they do all the time in
a single dialog box without having to do it in 2-3 steps all over
Joomla.

- a way to lock down styles I don't want them accessing, but giving
access to styles I do want them to use. This should be completely easy
and straightforward to do, and it should not involve hunting through
plugins and components to do it. The interface should not mean you
must know how to read a stylesheet to set this up -- it should give
you a list of styles the client could access, and you can choose which
ones are included. Remember we have tons of people in the Joomla
community new to web development who either don't know CSS at all or
who only know it through Dreamweaver, so make it easy for them.

- no underline button. No one should be underlining things on the site
that aren't links. (I suppose we could extend this to disabling any
features in the editor we wish.)

- when my client comes to training, I want them to say "WOW! This is
totally easier than I expected! I can do this!"


WYSIWYG Pro and JCE do provide most of these functionalities for
clients, but it's extra time to buy/download the components, install,
and configure them. It's not obvious to developers new to Joomla that
the WYSIWYG is changeable, either. For whatever reason, having modules/
components for shopping carts, banner ads, calendars, etc all make
sense, but not changing the editor. I think the editor just feels like
it's more "built in" to the interface.

We can work on the training piece for developers new to Joomla that
the editor can be changed, but it would be nice to have an editor that
works really well by default.

thanks,
Jen

[Tibor Tóth]

Hi to all!
Only want to share some of my hints :)

Understand, that everybody want lightweight, cool editor in future
version of Joomla!

Facts:
- Tiny 2.x not supported anymore
- New features in Tiny 3.x
- Current plugin for integration of Tiny2 has many hardcoded config
options

Few weeks before I put to the tracker new plugin for Tiny 3.2.1.
After chat with Elin, Ole and other, I continue with dev of new
version of this plugin, but not only "face-lift" of it.

Some ideas/main logic of my new plugin:

1. Plugin use core Tiny release - easy upgrade in the future, just
copy the jscript folder to right place.
2. Changed logic of functionality - I extend this option to next 3
values:
* Simple * use Tinyv3 simple theme, no plugin, no extras - see
http://tinymce.moxiecode.com/examples/example_04.php upper instance
* Advanced * use Tinyv3 advanced theme, no plugin, no extras - see
http://tinymce.moxiecode.com/examples/example_04.php bottom instance
* Extended * use Tinyv3 advanced theme, plugins (configured via
params), extras (tinybrowser) - see http://tinymce.moxiecode.com/examples/full.php
3. Correct setup of gzip-ed version loading (in my localhost simple
mode = 58kB of gz file need to load !)
4. All plugins can be switched on/off via params - easy example:
safari plugin load every time and quick return, if no Safari browser,
BUT he loaded at startup for IE/FF/Opera users.
5. Integration of small and cool Tinybrowser for file_callback - see
http://www.lunarvis.com/products/tinymcefilebrowserwithupload.php -
this one can resolve Jen's PDF upload problem :)
6. Logic to easy add new plugins - not delivered by core, but very
useful for some users:
* loremipsum * http://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/lorem-ipsum
* Google Translations plugin *
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2027697&group_id=103281&atid=738747
or any other from http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=103281&atid=738747
7. Use current frontend template as content_css for Tiny - user can
see REAL WYSIWYG version of article, can use frontend class from drop-
down in editor, etc...
8. New/corrected version of plugins: Word Paste (also important by
me!), Code cleanup, XHTML validity, accessibility, and many others...
9. more coming soon... :)

In nutshell: I vote for Tinyv3 for now. Many user of Joomla! use this
editor many years. We can talk about mootools alternative editors,
there are many interesting project of JS editors (NicEdit is one of
them: http://nicedit.com/index.php).
I spend many times with integration of WYSIWIG editors (SPAW2, Xinha,
FCK). Every of editor has nice and cool features, but any of them not
resolve all of users needs/problems.
IMHO we need to add for upcoming Joomla! users lightweight, but basic
or/and extend functionality editor.
Joomla! is a CMS - and if content submit not comfort, easy, valid,
then user may think: That is not for me! :( Daily I support many users
in Hungarian forum, believe me, editor is very important part of CMS!

If any ideas, pro/contra - share it! :)

p.s. New version of my Tiny v3 plugin coming soon! (hope, 1-2 days in-
house testing ) and I upload it to tracker.

[Adrian Rosian]

Hello,

On most topics, I have to agree with Jen.
Let us not forget though that Joomla is a CMS who has different
levels of users. That means that if you are an admin, you must have
some knowledge as a webmaster. I do agree that for basic users Web
Page Administration is wizardry (and I love the IE part, it's so sadly
funny). But having a website is a responsibility, you cannot expect
for the users who don't know how to edit their site to take care of
security or other things.
I surely agree with the image and link insertion, this should be
taken into consideration. Another approach could be to choose the
editor that is the most lightweight, but the most susceptible to
extension. After all, this is the true power of the Joomla Framework
(easily extensible). I think we can rely on the community to provide
plugins for different tasks.
I like both mooeditable and wysiwyg, and I like them mostly because
they are mootools based. I think the Joomla core team was right when
they chose Moootools for Javascript tasks.

Best regards,
Adrian
http://www.treidorinte.ro

[elin]

Actually, one of the things that needs to happen is that more
templaters need to include editor.css in their templates, which is
more of an education issue for them than and editor issue.

Ability to add and remove buttons, essential.

PDFs (and other non images such as spreadsheets and documents) are
huge frustration for users that at this time that they can be uploaded
but not linked via the media manager. Would be great if they could be
accessed via a link button along with a list of content items and menu
items.

Elin

[Gergő Erdősi]

Ok, so let's try to make a decision. It's easy to show editors, but it
doesn't help in the decision, we could link many other... So, at the
moment TinyMCE is our editor. First please give reasons why it is not
good (if possible in list format), why do you think we should remove
it. When doing this please think about TinyMCE 3, not about 2. Tibor
has a good post above which describes what TinyMCE 3 knows. Second, if
you think we should remove TinyMCE (3) and you gave reasons for doing
that, please tell us what editor do you think is better, and what are
the advantages of it against TinyMCE. Of course if you think TinyMCE
is good and there is no need to replace it, post it too. Thanks!

--
Gergő Erdősi



2009/5/26 elin <elin....@gmail.com>:

[Mark Dexter]

If Tiny v3 solves the Word paste and other issues that Tibor
discusses, then I think it should be the leading candidate for 1.6
default editor. I would propose that we get Tiny v3 working with 1.6
and then evaluate it (and other possible candidates) once 1.6 is
stable enough for testing. If the Wordpress editor is a possible
candidate, I would love to see that evaluated as well.

I also agree with the post earlier that the default editor should be
the one that is targeted for the least technical users. That doesn't
necessarily mean that it should be stripped down of functionality.
Non-technical users are the ones who need the most help with
formatting (for example, paste from Word), inserting links, and
uploading images and PDF files.

Thanks.

2009/5/26 Gergő Erdősi <gergo....@joomline.org>:

[Hannes Papenberg]

My proposal never was to remove it. I just see deficits in terms of
simplicity in it.

Pros for TinyMCE:
- Its a very complex and complete editor
- It has a plugin system, that makes it easily extendable
- It allows extensive changes of the code it produces with classes and such.

Cons for TinyMCE
- Its just to complex. For a new user, its a pushback

Why to add a simple Mootools powered editor:
- The available editors in this area are very simple, but in terms of
creating normal text, its enough.
- With mootools being loaded anyway, the additional load is going to be
very minimal.

Why to add a code editor with syntax highlighting:
- We should support syntax highlighting in our template manager for
editing the template and css.

:-)

Hannes

Gergő Erdősi schrieb:

[Hans]

L.S.
Since the choosing a editor is hot at the moment let me chime in with a
related issue.

Regardless of choice of editor as far as i can tell there is no support voor
uploading language files for an editor through the Joomla language files
system. This is understandable since the editor is a external component. But
starters on Joomla just download the language file for their mothertongue
and expect that all Joomla core "components" adhere to the new language.
Well not so for the core installed editor.

Off course there is a quick and easy fix. Just include all available
languages for the chosen editor. Naturally this won't solve all situations
(think of people wanting a language file added only after Joomla has
packaged).

Maybe that the translation team can think up a workable solution for this.

My 2 cents.

Hans.

[ot2sen]

Find that a complex editor like TinyMCE is what most end users expect to meet when creating/editing an article in a Content Management System like Joomla!

 

Could there then also be room for a simple moo editor and a syntax editor for the advanced users, then that certainly wouldnt have negative impact on the overall impression all users would have.

Pros for TinyMCE:

- It live up to the general ad for CMS´ ~ Its just like creating a document in Open Office Writer or MS Word.

- Known interface (quite similar to desktop programs)

- Almost complete and advanced editor, covering the functions needed for most content writers.

 

Cons for TinyMCE:

- Has one extremely important downside, and thats the missing option to easily link articles/documents/etc. Users expect such functionality, and its a very frequently asked question in the forums and among customers (if you dont add an editor plugin)

Something with the functionality of the Linkr extension being included would be a huge plus.

http://extensions.joomla.org/extensions/structure-&-navigation/site-links/4010/details

 

Ole

 

2009/5/26 Hannes Papenberg <hack...@googlemail.com>

[Gergő Erdősi]

Reading the old and the new replies, then my proposal would be: No
Editor + TinyMCE 3 + a code editor for templates. I don't think a
MooTools based editor is necessary in the core, TinyMCE has a compact
mode which gives an easy to use interface for users. Actually in the
configuration we can define which buttons, or button groups should be
displayed, so we can make it more simple if we want.

Oli: Yes, I also saw asking that question many times, would be good to
find a solution for that too, however first I would like make the
decision on the editors.

--
Gergő Erdősi



2009/5/26 ot2sen <ot2...@gmail.com>:

[Tibor Tóth]

Agree with Gergő.
In Tiny3 we can build our own joomla theme.
This theme can include all needed buttons, funtions for power Joomla!
user.

@syntax highlighter: imo no problem integrate CodeMirror to Tiny3.

Regards

Tibor

> >http://extensions.joomla.org/extensions/structure-&-navigation/site-l...
>
> > Ole
>
> > 2009/5/26 Hannes Papenberg <hackwa...@googlemail.com>

> >> > 2009/5/26 elin <elin.war...@gmail.com>:

[Hannes Papenberg]

Why should we add syntax highlighting to a wysiwyg editor? especially
since we don't use wysiwyg in the template manager.

Tibor Tóth schrieb:

[Gergő Erdősi]

We shouldn't, I would like to see CodeMirror as a standalone editor
and used only for templates (by default).

--
Gergő Erdősi



2009/5/26 Hannes Papenberg <hack...@googlemail.com>:

[Mark Dexter]

Agree with Gergo and Tibor. I assume this means we can do something
about pasting from Word, inserting links to other items in the site,
and uploading images and PDF's? Mark

2009/5/26 Tibor Tóth <tibin...@gmail.com>:

[Joseph Simony]

Agree with Tibor and Gergő,

One more vote goes for TinyMCE 3.
A nice touch would be a switch button from simple (less functions) to
extended view.

Syntax highlighting is a long time needed feature for templates and
search/replace buttons are also handy when it comes to source code
editing.

All the best,
goyo

[Amy Stephen]

@Jen - WP uses Tiny MCE 3 for their editor - with the simple template. ( Plus, they have created a very nice interface for uploading and sharing media.)

It will be nice to have Tiny MCE 3 - and Tibor has a nice list of extras that will be super helpful.That'd be my voice for 1.6.

[Mark Dexter]

That's great to know and imo is an excellent reason to use Tiny. Mark

[infograf768]

In fact, I see only one drawback in using Tiny, and as you may guess,
it is the language issue.
Any simple editor added to Core which has easy multilingual switch
would be welcome.

On 26 May, 21:07, Mark Dexter <dextercow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's great to know and imo is an excellent reason to use Tiny. Mark
>

[KenMcD]

@Tibor

One requested addition - easy one-click switch to formatted source
view.

I constantly find myself using your Tamka Spaw Editor for this
feature.
The usual TinyMCE HTML source display is a mess.
And it is displayed in a slow pop-up.
The Spaw one-click switch is much easier to use.

WordPress uses TinyMCE and they have one-click tabs for "Visual" and
"HTML" views.
The HTML tab is a formatted source.
See example screenshot of the tabs here:
http://codex.wordpress.org/images/b/b6/write1.png

The Spaw Editor has a one-click switch between "Design" and "HTML"
views.
The HTML button is a formatted source.
See demo here (buttons are at lower right):
http://www.spaweditor.com/en/disp.php/en_products/en_spaw/en_spaw_demo
Screenshot of just the tabs is here:
http://www.spaweditor.com/img/products/resizing.gif

Xinha Editor has a tool bar icon which is a one-click toggle to
formatted HTML source view.
See the demo here:
http://xinha.raimundmeyer.de/x_examples/ext_example.html

JoomlaFCK Editor also displays formatted source, but in a pop-up.

A quick-switch between WYSIWYG and formatted HTML source would be a
helpful "user experience" upgrade.
Please consider adding this feature to the updated editor.

Thanks.

KM

On 26 May, 07:29, Tibor Tóth <tibino.t...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi to all!
> Only want to share some of my hints :)
>
> Understand, that everybody want lightweight, cool editor in future
> version of Joomla!
>
> Facts:
> - Tiny 2.x not supported anymore
> - New features in Tiny 3.x
> - Current plugin for integration of Tiny2 has many hardcoded config
> options
>
> Few weeks before I put to the tracker new plugin for Tiny 3.2.1.
> After chat with Elin, Ole and other, I continue with dev of new
> version of this plugin, but not only "face-lift" of it.
>
> Some ideas/main logic of my new plugin:
>
> 1. Plugin use core Tiny release - easy upgrade in the future, just
> copy the jscript folder to right place.
> 2. Changed logic of functionality - I extend this option to next 3
> values:

>  * Simple * use Tinyv3 simple theme, no plugin, no extras - seehttp://tinymce.moxiecode.com/examples/example_04.phpupper instance
>  * Advanced * use Tinyv3 advanced theme, no plugin, no extras - seehttp://tinymce.moxiecode.com/examples/example_04.phpbottom instance

>  * Extended * use Tinyv3 advanced theme, plugins (configured via

> params), extras (tinybrowser) - seehttp://tinymce.moxiecode.com/examples/full.php

> 3. Correct setup of gzip-ed version loading (in my localhost simple
> mode = 58kB of gz file need to load !)
> 4. All plugins can be switched on/off via params - easy example:
> safari plugin load every time and quick return, if no Safari browser,
> BUT he loaded at startup for IE/FF/Opera users.
> 5. Integration of small and cool Tinybrowser for file_callback - seehttp://www.lunarvis.com/products/tinymcefilebrowserwithupload.php-
> this one can resolve Jen's PDF upload problem :)
> 6. Logic to easy add new plugins - not delivered by core, but very
> useful for some users:

> * loremipsum *http://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/lorem-ipsum
> * Google Translations plugin *http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2027697&group_id=1032...
> or any other fromhttp://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=103281&atid=738747

[Tibor Tóth]

@Ken

Well, Spaw2, Xinha using different methode for display HTML source.
In Tinyv3 we have only HTML button.

With using inlinepopups plugin we can use div for popup instead of
classic html popup. More quick imo. :)
Another solution is using Toogle JS switcher -
http://tinymce.moxiecode.com/examples/example_01.php
But this way only "switch off" Tiny and show classic textarea element
- not well formated.

Just now I playing with mceToggleEditor - http://wiki.moxiecode.com/index.php/TinyMCE:Commands
Hope to find best solution.

Thanks for tip!

Tibor

[happy_noodle_boy]

My suggestions:

1) Stick with TinyMCE 3. It is very mature, stable, well structured
and well documented project with committed developers with a very wide
user base. It is also LGPL.

2) If you must have a syntax highlighting editor (seperate from the
main WYSIWYG) use CodeMirror. It is possible to add additional HTML
functions to this (basically selection replacement not DOM editing),
see my JCE AdvCode dialog.

3) You could look at loading CodeMirror on the textarea when switching
TinyMCE off, this does add quite a bit of code overhead on the page
load though. Perhaps Moxiecode will add this option at a later date?

I may be able to help with 2 and possibly 3...

Ryan

On 27 May, 11:29, Tibor Tóth <tibino.t...@gmail.com> wrote:
> @Ken
>
> Well, Spaw2, Xinha using different methode for display HTML source.
> In Tinyv3 we have only HTML button.
>
> With using inlinepopups plugin we can use div for popup instead of
> classic html popup. More quick imo. :)

> Another solution is using Toogle JS switcher -http://tinymce.moxiecode.com/examples/example_01.php

> But this way only "switch off" Tiny and show classic textarea element
> - not well formated.
>

> Just now I playing with mceToggleEditor  -http://wiki.moxiecode.com/index.php/TinyMCE:Commands

> ...
>
> read more »

[Jen Kramer McKibben]

Hi all --

I am happy to go with whatever technology you're telling me solves my
client's problems and solves my problems.

I was so happy to use Joomla, because it meant I could stop building
websites with Dreamweaver and have clients use Contribute to edit
them.

Contribute is really, really awful, but it always did one thing right:
it felt like Microsoft Word when you used it. That meant that clients
were instantly comfortable using it, and they really took ownership
for their site.

I understand all of the arguments about how clients have to be a
little more tech savvy when caring for their sites.

However, WE understand how to swap out editors for whatever makes us
happy. Our clients are stuck with whatever they're given. Newbies are
stuck with whatever is there for a little while, until they learn how
to change things.

I just hope we design for the lowest technical denominator, where the
article editor is concerned, to enhance usability for our clients.
Give clients a chance to feel comfortable with Joomla and they will do
great things with it. If they always feel like they're on the verge of
breaking something, they won't get as much out of their site. Some of
that is a training issue, yes -- but a great interface goes a long way
to helping the situation.

Thanks!
Jen

[sankesolutions]

I also agree with Jen's earlier comments that the users should be
considered. Had to laugh at some of the points, as I have seen many
people doing the same thing and struggling to use even basic editors,
I often use JCE stripped down with minimal buttons, and still get
emails/phonecalls.

Another point I want to raise which is related to editors are the
buttons Joomla provides for images, pagebreak etc. Having worked with
a number of people I often get asked why they are at the bottom and
not part of the editor, I also observe that when looking to add an
image or pagebreak they move the mouse across the editor buttons
looking for the function there, before being reminded or remembering
its at the bottom of the window. This is particularly true in small
screen resolutions, laptops etc, us developers probably sometimes
forget how small many users screens are, and so these buttons are
below the 'fold' of the page.

It would be good to to have the ability to include these functions in
the editor through some kind of hook, or better still have them as
smaller buttons, next to, below or around the editor so for the user
experience they are in the same area as the editor and all 'functions'
are together.

Paul

[happy_noodle_boy]

On the issue of Paste from Word, the new TinyMCE 3.2.4.1 has the best
cleanup of any other editor I've come across, including complete
conversion of list elements.

[Gergő Erdősi]

We made a decision on editors, Joomla! 1.6 will have No Editor,
TinyMCE 3 and CodeMirror. Thanks everyone for the help!

--
Gergő Erdősi



2009/5/27 happy_noodle_boy <ryand...@gmail.com>:

[Ercan Özkaya]

I really would love to hear more about how people want to see TinyMCE
configured by default and what problems we need to solve in core. I
agree with the comments that editor buttons (pagebreak, image) and
editor itself seems unnecessarily diverse. Also we could use some help
from people familiar with Wordpress to improve our interface for media
management.

On May 27, 7:08 pm, Gergő Erdősi <gergo.erd...@joomline.org> wrote:
> We made a decision on editors, Joomla! 1.6 will have No Editor,
> TinyMCE 3 and CodeMirror. Thanks everyone for the help!
>
> --
> Gergő Erdősi
>

> 2009/5/27 happy_noodle_boy <ryandem...@gmail.com>:

[ot2sen]

Hi Hans,

 

Better support for and easier to handle addition of extra languages for the editor(s), certainly is something the Translation Teams and international users do wish for.

Maybe that the translation team can think up a workable solution for this.

We can try, at least :)

 

Cheers,

Ole Ottosen - Joomla! Translation Coordination Team

2009/5/26 Hans <hens...@hotmail.com>

[KenMcD]

@Tibor,

The latest WordPress 2.8-beta2 is using TinyMCE Version: 3.2.4
(2009-05-22).
And that HTML tab instantly changes to a formatted source view.
But I cannot tell exactly how they are doing it. (with my basic
skills)

From the way the code is displayed it appears it is probably just
using the basic
TinyMCE Apply Source Formatting Option
http://wiki.moxiecode.com/index.php/TinyMCE:Configuration/apply_source_formatting
By default this is On in TinyMCE 3.2.x.

I am testing with an older TinyMCE 3.2.x plugin I found in the forum
awhile back.
I did figure-out that if I turn-off both the "Code Cleanup" parameters
that the HTML pop-up window will display the source code with basic
formatting like WP.
Much easier to read than the usual long mess.

Now if you could determine how WP put that in a one-click tab . . .
I did trace the WP editor toolbar buttons to the general-template.php
file.
wordpress_root/wp-includes/general-template.php
Around line 1630 is <div id="editor-toolbar"> within the function
the_editor.
That is where the quick switch tabs/buttons live.
Perhaps with your skills you can see how they did it by looking at
WordPress.
;-)

Thanks.

KM

On 27 May, 03:29, Tibor Tóth <tibino.t...@gmail.com> wrote:
> @Ken
>
> Well, Spaw2, Xinha using different methode for display HTML source.
> In Tinyv3 we have only HTML button.
>
> With using inlinepopups plugin we can use div for popup instead of
> classic html popup. More quick imo. :)

> Another solution is using Toogle JS switcher -http://tinymce.moxiecode.com/examples/example_01.php

> But this way only "switch off" Tiny and show classic textarea element
> - not well formated.
>

> Just now I playing with mceToggleEditor  -http://wiki.moxiecode.com/index.php/TinyMCE:Commands

> ...
>
> read more »

[Torkil]

I realize we are discussing a CMS, but I have to say this nonetheless:

I am all for a stripped down core with almost nothing included; No
components except those needed for administration like com_installer,
no unneccessary modules or plugins. I am willing to discuss
com_content, as I am yet to set up a site that does not use it, but
with recent CCK-ish components spawning all over the place,
com_content might become obsolete on many sites too.

Uninstalling com_content should definitely be an option!

I would apply the same bloat-arguement to WYSIWYG too:

Core should not have anything more than the required basics. If you
really NEED syntax highlighting, then you are skilled enough to
install en WYSIWYG editor that provides just that.

Bloated core with lots of stuff requires much more work and resources
to maintain, resources that instead could be used to develop Joomla
further. I must say I really, really like what JoomlaTools has
accomplished with Koowa, and how much easier that makes component
development. There is definitely stuff there that could be stolen/
borrowed or used as inspiration :)

> ...
>
> read more >>

[Tibor Tóth]

Hi to all!

TinyMCE 3.2.4.1 version plugin for Joomla! 1.5.x uploaded to tracker.
http://joomlacode.org/gf/project/joomla/tracker/?action=TrackerItemEdit&tracker_item_id=12376

TinyMCE 3.2.4.1 version plugin for Joomla! 1.5.x
New features:
- Skin selection (default, o2k7) with skin variant
- Force newline (p, br) corrected
- Template CSS modified - now work with frontside template css and
systerm css
both
- Reorder init() function by Moxiecode wiki
(http://wiki.moxiecode.com/index.php/TinyMCE:Configuration)
- Remove save callback function - not need in 3.x imo
- NEW! Dynamic loading Toggle button in editor-xtd area: one-click
toggle
editor!
- 3 mode switcher: simple, advanced, extended
- gzip loading support
- integrated tinybrowser in extended mode
- custom plugin/button options
- UI language selector auto/manual
- new plugins options - inlinepopups, contextmenu, etc...
- new buttons options - viasualchars, nonbreaking, etc...
- reordered params - more intuitive, based on editor mode
- minor code clean

ToDo:
* Language file update, hardcoded text move to language file

Note: Installer tested on clean J! 1.5.10, DO NOT USE ON LIVE SITE FOR
NOW!!!

Testers welcome!

p.s. Please, download it, test it, comment it! :)
For Safari users: remember to switch on Safari plugin (Advanced
Parameters) - this was off by default!
For full featured editor, please, switch to Extended mode. ;)
Comressed version load faster. ;)

Waiting for your replies...

Best regards

Tibor Tóth

> ...
>
> read more >>

[Compass]

+1 for Hannes

I would say the editor is one of the biggest usability hurdles in
Joomla right now. I'd say that if you talk to devs that implement lots
of client sites (50+) you'll find again and again that one of the
first things they do is replace the editor to reduce the support
headache from end users.

+1 for Elin

We have two types of users here, one that need a more restrictive
environment so they can't add <font> galore and another who are power
users and need a more robust solution. To me that implies 3 (when you
include no editor) options.

+1 for Jen

I think she hit on all the major issues of working in editors.

Xstandard?
Can someone articulate for me why this is *not* a good solution for
the "non-techie" group of content workers?

[Compass]

"We made a decision on editors, Joomla! 1.6 will have No Editor,
TinyMCE 3 and CodeMirror. Thanks everyone for the help! "

?

Isn't discussion still going on?

[Tibor Tóth]

IMHO we can continue discuss about editors.
There are many other questions:

1. How setup different config for frontend submit? - in many cases
admin need full featured editor, but for frontend submit want to
"reduce" plugins/features of current editor...
2. Include or not editor-xtd functionality directly to editor?: Image/
pagabreak/readmore button via editor plugin....
3. Extend or not call params for editor? Add extra params to call
editor function (different skin, plugins loading) on frontend/
backend // function onDisplay()

Any other ideas welcome :)

Tibor