Vincent Massol wrote: > On Aug 18, 2008, at 8:18 PM, Vincent Massol wrote: > > >> On Aug 18, 2008, at 8:03 PM, Marius Dumitru Florea wrote: >> >> >>>> On Aug 18, 2008, at 5:54 PM, Ludovic Dubost wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> I think currently we can only use the new wysiwyg if we have a page >>>>> using XWiki 2.0 syntax right ? >>>>> >>>> yes. >>>> >>> The new WYSIWYG is not bound to the XWiki 2.0 syntax. I have a >>> XHTMLConverter component with two implementations at this time: one >>> (fully >>> working) using Vincent's new rendering module and one (needing some >>> adjustments) using the old Radeox engine. I could detect the page >>> syntax >>> and lookup the right implementation, but is it worth doing? If not, >>> how >>> should I react when the new WYSIWYG is forced on a page with the old >>> syntax? >>> >> I have a question: if we use radeox is the new editor going to be >> better than the old one? >> >> I think it's not worth doing it. When the old syntax is used there >> shouldn't be any way to edit the page using the new WYSIWYG editor >> IMO. That will also provide another incentive to move to the new >> syntax. >> ok for me if we have a button "convert to XWiki 2.0"
> > BTW we have the question for the office converter. It's converting > HTML to wiki syntax using the new rendering and thus we get new syntax > only. > > We really need to decide what we want. Any comment on my previous email? > > Thanks > -Vincent > > >> However moving to the new syntax is not something so we'll need to >> make it as painless as possible. >> >> Yes I think we need a button when a page is in xwiki syntax 1.0 to do "convert to XWiki 2.0 syntax" >> I think this new wysiwyg + the new rendering may warrant us calling >> this XWiki 2.0 when we activate them and make them the default. We >> could release 1.6 with these as options only that can enabled in the >> configuration. Then release a 2.0 with them enabled by default and >> with the old ones as configurable. >> >> I agree +1 >> WDYT? >> >> Thanks >> -Vincent >> >> >>>>> Jerome Velociter wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> +1. I've seen the new WYSIWYG in action and think it would be >>>>>> great/beneficial to have it experimental in 1.6M1. >>>>>> What about a parameter in xwiki.cfg to have it always available in >>>>>> the >>>>>> "editors" panel, like "New WYSIWYG [experimental]" ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Jerome. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi devs, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I propose to move the new WYSIWYG editor into the platform in >>>>>>> order to >>>>>>> have it as an experimental feature for 1.6M1. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The following steps should be taken: >>>>>>> * Create a platform/web/wysiwyg module to host the code currently >>>>>>> resided >>>>>>> in sandbox/wysiwyg >>>>>>> * Change templates/edit.vm, templates/editpanels.vm and create >>>>>>> templates/editwysiwygnew.vm to make XE aware of the new editor. >>>>>>> This way >>>>>>> our users will be able to experiment the new WYSIWYG editor on >>>>>>> any >>>>>>> page, >>>>>>> by having editor=wysiwygnew in the edit URL. >>>>>>> * Change platform/web/pom/xml and enterprise/web/pom.xml >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Here's my +1 >>>>>>> Marius >>>>>>> > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > devs@xwiki.org > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > > -- Ludovic Dubost Blog: http://blog.ludovic.org/ XWiki: http://www.xwiki.com Skype: ldubost GTalk: ldubost _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
