Dojo's editor
Kevin Dangoor
this is that an editor like that is a fairly complex piece of
software, and I generally trust Alex Russell and Co when it comes to
complex javascript.
http://alex.dojotoolkit.org/?p=560
Kevin
--
Kevin Dangoor
TurboGears / Zesty News
email: k...@blazingthings.com
company: http://www.BlazingThings.com
blog: http://www.BlueSkyOnMars.com
Ronald Jaramillo
with the code textareas. Otherwise (load speed time aside) it works
find.
Cheers.
Ronald
________________________________
Ronald Jaramillo
mail: ronald AT checkandshare DOT com
blog: http://www.checkandshare.com/blog
Kevin Dangoor
>
> I'll take it for a whirl. Currently tinyMCE is giving me a hard time
> with the code textareas. Otherwise (load speed time aside) it works
> find.
I use TinyMCE on my blog (since it comes with WordPress) and it
generally works pretty well. But that's not to say that Dojo's editor
isn't more polished. My guess is that it'll handle the corner cases
better (UI-wise). This will get more important the more editing we're
doing with it. I wouldn't spend a huge amount of time on it... if it's
easy to install and run, go for it.
Kevin
Kevin Horn
If the Dojo editor looks like an option, we'll need to keep in mind how much overhead it will introduce, though I can't imagine it's more than TinyMCE!
Also brought up at the sprint was the idea to allow multiple editors, and let the site administrator (or maybe even the individual user...though this might cause problems with interactions between editors) decide which to use. I'm not sure this is really necessary, especially at this point, but it might be a nice feature one day.
Kevin H.
Kevin Dangoor
> This was mentioned as far back as the PyCon sprint. The general consensus
> then was that TinyMCE was "the simplest solution that could possibly work",
> but that Dojo's editor was probably better, and we'd look into it when we
> had more time. I haven't really looked at it in any detail, myself, though
> on first glance, it seems not to have many features (img tags, etc.) though
> this could be a configuration issue...like TinyMCE in "basic" mode.
Yep, but I think the difference is that the editor is actually
packaged in a release now (according to that blog post by Alex). I
don't think that was the case a couple months back.
> If the Dojo editor looks like an option, we'll need to keep in mind how much
> overhead it will introduce, though I can't imagine it's more than TinyMCE!
My guess is that Dojo, in total, is likely to be larger. However,
because of its packaging system, it's not likely to bring in as much
code to be up and running. That's all wild speculation, though.
> Also brought up at the sprint was the idea to allow multiple editors, and
> let the site administrator (or maybe even the individual user...though this
> might cause problems with interactions between editors) decide which to use.
> I'm not sure this is really necessary, especially at this point, but it
> might be a nice feature one day.
That's one of those things that will likely happen when someone
decides that they don't like the editor that's in place...
Kevin
Karl Guertin
robust, better design. Codebase wise, I don't believe there's a
significant difference if you're using an editor build rather than the
dojo kitchen sink. I mentioned replacing the current editor with the
dojo one a few weeks back, but I tend to have development eyes bigger
than my stomach.