On 10 February 2011 23:28, Platonides platoni...@gmail.com wrote:
David Gerard wrote:
My last experiment with FCK was hampered by it messing up the tags
used by Extension:InputBox - our users are very fond of the Create an
article! box I put on the front page of our internal wikis, but
Good idea! Though FCK kindly makes it impossible even to properly
create the *template*. I had to comment it out in LocalSettings.php,
create {{Create an article}} then uncomment it. Still, it's there now
... sort of a workaround :-)
- d.
To set a page, like your template, to not use the
I have a requirement for an intranet wiki for sales, marketing and
other people who have no technical abilities whatsoever.
I'd like to use MediaWiki. This requires WYSIWYG.
There is no good WYSIWYG for MediaWiki - but what are the least-worst
solutions others have managed with this requirement,
What do you mean by good? A full-fledged office suite, e.g. Open or MS?
Auto-completion when typing in names of articles in your wiki, or
templates?
As far as I can tell, Media Wiki was designed for relatively simple
formatting. I admit I write in wiki-text, though I now tend to switch to
(to list as well)
-- Forwarded message --
From: David Gerard dger...@gmail.com
Date: 10 February 2011 16:58
Subject: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Least-worst present WYSIWYG solution?
To: Haim (Howard) Roman ro...@jct.ac.il
On 10 February 2011 16:46, Haim (Howard) Roman ro...@jct.ac.il
I've been using the FCKeditor with our wikis and it is fine for regular use.
So if your users will just be entering text and an occasional table or image it
is more than fine. But, if they plan to do things a little more fancy such as
adding links or alt-text to images or using templates they
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Sullivan, James (NIH/CIT) [C]
sulli...@mail.nih.gov wrote:
[...] But, if they plan to do things a little more fancy such as adding links
Links sure are fancy!
-Chad
___
MediaWiki-l mailing list
On 10 February 2011 17:02, Sullivan, James (NIH/CIT) [C]
sulli...@mail.nih.gov wrote:
I've been using the FCKeditor with our wikis and it is fine for regular use.
So if your users will just be entering text and an occasional table or image
it is more than fine. But, if they plan to do
. If they did I
would be getting a lot of complaints about using the FCKeditor wrt images.
-Jim
-Original Message-
From: David Gerard [mailto:dger...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 2:01 PM
To: MediaWiki announcements and site admin list
Subject: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Least-worst
On 10 February 2011 19:24, Sullivan, James (NIH/CIT) [C]
sulli...@mail.nih.gov wrote:
The FCKeditor does not handle these image attributes, just size, position and
caption, which was my only point about links, and yes, I consider it fancy
since most users do not add these attributes to their
...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 2:35 PM
To: MediaWiki announcements and site admin list
Subject: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Least-worst present WYSIWYG solution?
On 10 February 2011 19:24, Sullivan, James (NIH/CIT) [C]
sulli...@mail.nih.gov wrote:
The FCKeditor does not handle these image
David Gerard wrote:
This is most promising :-D Yes, if they want to do fancy image
attributes they can use wikitext :-)
My last experiment with FCK was hampered by it messing up the tags
used by Extension:InputBox - our users are very fond of the Create an
article! box I put on the front
12 matches
Mail list logo
