This is an archived forum and the content is probably no longer relevant, but is provided here for posterity.
The active forums are here.
December 13, 2007 6:22pm
Subscribe [5]#46 / Apr 01, 2008 2:34pm
True. In the end, it’s probably best from a business point of view to let those areas handle that, that way one area doesn’t take up a disproportionate amount of income (in support costs).
Incidentally, why does TinyMCE and the Firefox standard textarea spell checker not work together? I don’t want to make a PHP AJAX call just to check spelling! What an annoyance.
Well, anyways… 😊
#47 / Apr 01, 2008 2:54pm
McGehee, was that back in the days when the big bang was just a bright light… 😛
That was back when it was known as the Little Pop Theory.
The web was steam-powered.
And it was all uploads, both ways, in the snow.
#48 / May 10, 2008 11:03am
I wonder how many people want an full blown “WYSIWYG editor”?
Isn’t it just a matter of a switch button between the textarea
and an editable iframe?
<BODY CONTENTEDITABLE="true" onload='document.designMode = "On";'>Maybe it doesn’t work in some browsers, but it does in 90%.
Remeber, its an option.
#49 / May 29, 2008 12:56pm
I’ve only recently purchased a license for my first commercial project using EE. I thought long and hard about the WYSIWYG issue and almost considered going for another CMS due to concerns over the lack of a built-in standard editor in EE.
Eventually, I decided that EE was the best system and went about putting a case together to try to convince my client to use Markdown. His only content management experience was with MS Frontpage, so I geared up for an uphill struggle.
I had a whole presentation prepared for him, it was all planned out…. first I’d show him some examples of raw HTML and then move on to the standard EE interface. After that, I’d show him how easy Markdown was in comparison.
My mission was to convince him that Markdown ruled… but, of course, I was prepared to back down and integrate something like FCKEditor or TinyMCE if he outright rebelled. At the end of the day, we need to do what the client wants, right?
So… I sat down and gave him a quick example of how to make something bold in HTML.
“Alright, so I just but those B things on each side and it will go bold? Easy enough!” was his reaction.
I was gobsmacked.
I think I’ll still go for Markdown. If he’s ok with raw HTML, he’ll love Markdown. The thing is, though, that sometimes we, as developers, can be a little over-protective of our clients and sometimes perhaps even underestimate them. I’m sure that there are people out there who would simply insist on a WYSIWYG editor or take their business elsewhere… but my hunch is that they’re in a minority. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that many people tired of WYSIWYG-hell may even consider Markdown or Textile to be an upgrade 😉
#50 / Sep 10, 2008 11:04am
I know this post is kinda well… dead, but I thought I’d add something anyway.
The client is not always right but they do always want to be heard. I end up being forced into them because they exist. Clients have deadlines too and they hesitate to add more work of learning practically anything… They know they exist so they want em sometimes.
This is how I learned that I hate wysiwyg! 😊
Why? because it gives clients the ability to screw up the part I like most about my work. The page & content weighting and typography. In essence they turn a nicely formatted page into crap and then it reflects badly on my work. 😠
So I got to thinking about it and EE actually helped me realized by their omission of thee wysiwyg that it’s not needed very much.
So I got to thinking…
The client is not really that into making stuff look different if they are satisfied with an existing format and they can simply plug new content into it.
What does this mean? Not much with EE, just a few extra custom fields and some css, and maybe some conditionals. Here is a very basic example.
Let’s see… the client has a section on the home page that shows a pic, heading, and paragraph. The client wants to be able to change the content on this page including the heading and the text.
By giving each part it’s own field like my_pic, title, and body, you can “hard-style” the page accordingly and subsequent additions and updates will be respected. Clients love that because it serves them well. One thing I think wouldn’t be hard to do is use conditionals & custom fields (even a plugin) to allow clients to the option of changing which container they need for the content.
In fact the only place I’ve found that I now use it is on pages that allow clients to create Html formatted newsletters. Then they want to control the look and feel easily by dropping in pics and text and send it out. Only really elegant way I know of to achieve that. But that’s it nowhere else! 😡 :lol:
#51 / Sep 11, 2008 4:50pm
Personally I think not including a WYSIWYG editor is costing sales. Likely substantial ones too.
This is all well and good for the code critics and the people who know this stuff. If you didn’t you wouldn’t be here. But 99.99999% of the world could care less about learning HTML or anything else. They will use what they’re familiar with, and if it’s not there when it’s installed it won’t be used.
For those people that know this stuff, it’s pretty simple to turn it off. But to not included one at all alienates the same people you’re trying to target as CMS users.
They want to log in and post. period. No ifs ands or buts. They want to be able to simply copy text from a web page and paste it in with the same design result. They want to be able to change fonts, increase sizes, bold italic and underline words with buttons.
None of those are possible without a WYSIWYG.
People are lazy and will go to great lengths (ironic isn’t it?) to use something that caters to that laziness.
#52 / Sep 12, 2008 7:03pm
Textile with the Textile Editor Helper goes sort of halfway to WYSIWYG (WYSIWYG-ish, as the extension describes itself). The client gets to see the bold/italic/underline buttons and though clicking on them doesn’t boldface the text, just puts a Textile command around them, it does provide a bit of reassuramce that they don’t have to learn some arcane new formatting language because their web guy is incapable of giving them what they’ve had for years in Word.
Even better though if they’re Macheads and you can give ‘em MarsEdit. Any good Windows equivalents?