Note that if the admin doesn’t want to show multiple editors to its user, he should not install multiple editors either :)
(ofc there’s a problem right now in that the current editor is not an extension that you can uninstall). For advanced users, I still think it’s best to show all the active editors (in addition to the default which is set by the admin - We could have “(Default)” next to it in the menu. With UC3 the admin can decide whether he wants to make only 1 editor avail or several. Thanks -Vincent On 11 Jan 2016 at 14:52:46, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote: > Hi, > > I prefer B: I prefer to have things simpler for the user, while providing > power to the administrator. > > There can be multiple extensions that integrate themselves inside that menu > (like the real-time editor) but I don't see that as a benefit for the user, > but more confusing about all the types of editors. > > We already have 3 modes: WYSIWYG, Wiki, Inline + Objects + Class .... we > need to find ways to simplify that, rather than adding more things in the > menu (even if only for advanced users). > > The administrator should select the preferred editor from Configuration - > Edit Mode Settings - Editor - Default Editor (for the farm or per wiki). > The user will use the default value provided by admin or overwrite it from > his User Preferences (if he is advanced and knows about the existence of > multiple editors). > By default we should select the recommended editor to be used and this > should be changed just in exceptional / desired cases. > > Having multiple editors available is not something a normal user would care > about and doesn't provide additional/different benefits for the user. > Important is to provide the best tool by default. > > When adding the CKEditor first you will need to configure the wiki in order > to use it. After a testing period we can change the default editor if we'd > like. > > Off topic: I think that the Page syntax preference in the Document > Information should be removed. There are not that many variations between > 2.0 and 2.1 and I don't see why a normal user would care or want to chance > the syntax. The users should rely on the default/recommended and the > default is configured from Administration. > > Comment A: "GWT WYSIWYG" that would look super cryptic :) > > Thanks, > Caty > > > > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:27 PM, [email protected] > wrote: > > > > > > > On 11 Jan 2016 at 14:16:40, Marius Dumitru Florea ( > > [email protected](mailto:[email protected])) > > wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 2:00 PM, [email protected] > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Marius, > > > > > > > > I prefer to think in term of use cases. Here are the ones I see as > > > > important on this topic and that I think we need to ensure that we > > > > implement: > > > > > > > > UC1: Ability for admins to install an extension that contributes a new > > > > editor > > > > UC2: Ability for admins to select which editor is the default editor > > for > > > > their users in a given wiki (note that ideally this configuration > > should be > > > > per wiki for the farm use case) > > > > UC3: Ability for admins to decide which editors are active (i.e. which > > > > editors users will be able to configure or use). For example it should > > be > > > > possible to completely replace the GWT-based WYSIWYG by CKEeditor and > > > > preventing any user from using the GWT-based WYSIWYG editor. > > > > UC4: Ability for a user (simple or advanced) to explicitly decide which > > > > default editors he/she’ll use (in his/her user profile probably). > > Should > > > > override the editor selected in UC2 (but they should only see editors > > that > > > > are active, cf UC3) > > > > UC5: Ability for an advanced user to choose on the spot (on-demand) the > > > > editor to use to edit a given page, bypassing the default editor. > > Should > > > > override the editor selected in UC4. > > > > > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > > > > > All these use cases are covered by both A and B so it doesn't help me > > > choose one or the other. My question is more how to implement these use > > > cases: using A or B? > > > > Ok cool if they’re covered by A and B (it wasn’t mentioned in your email…). > > > > Note that currently there’s no default choice anymore for advanced users > > when they edit a page and we’d need to put that back (that’s UC4). > > > > Apart from this, I think I prefer A) than B). > > > > Thanks > > -Vincent > > > > > > Thanks > > > > -Vincent > > > > > > > > On 11 Jan 2016 at 12:31:12, Marius Dumitru Florea ( > > > > [email protected](mailto:[email protected])) > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi devs, > > > > > > > > > > I'm working on integrating CKEditor in XWiki and I'm wondering how > > the > > > > Edit > > > > > menu should reflect the fact that there are multiple editors > > available. I > > > > > see two options: > > > > > > > > > > (A) List all the available content editors in the Edit menu (note > > that > > > > the > > > > > menu is visible only for advanced users). E.g. Wiki, GWT WYSIWYG, > > > > CKEditor > > > > > > > > > > PROS: > > > > > * easier to implement (because there is already an UIX for this) > > > > > * easier to discover new content editors (e.g. after an admin > > installs an > > > > > extension that provides a content editor) > > > > > * ability to try a different content editor than the one configured > > (i.e. > > > > > without updating the configuration) > > > > > > > > > > CONS: > > > > > * the (advanced) user might not know, at first, which content editor > > to > > > > > choose from the Edit menu > > > > > * once the user has a preferred editor the other content editor > > entries > > > > > become noise (the user may want to hide them) > > > > > > > > > > (B) List only the edit modes in the Edit menu. E.g. Wiki, WYSIWYG > > > > > > > > > > PROS: > > > > > * easier to choose the edit mode (wiki/source vs. WYSIWYG) > > > > > * less crowded Edit menu (easier to scan, no noise) > > > > > > > > > > CONS: > > > > > * the user needs to edit his profile to discover the available > > editors > > > > for > > > > > Wiki/WYSIWYG modes > > > > > * harder to try the new content editors (you need to update the > > > > > configuration) > > > > > > > > > > Let's see what we need for each option: > > > > > > > > > > (A) Needs: > > > > > * UIX in the Edit menu (already available) > > > > > * 1 configuration option ("editing.content.defaultEditor") to > > configure > > > > the > > > > > default editor (at farm/wiki/space/user level). We can probably > > extend > > > > the > > > > > "Default editor to use" preference from the user profile to show all > > the > > > > > available content editors. > > > > > > > > > > (B) Needs: > > > > > * 3 configuration options: > > > > > ** default edit mode (Wiki vs. WYSIWYG), already available in the > > user > > > > > profile > > > > > ** default Wiki mode editor (only one editor for now so we can skip > > it) > > > > > ** default WYSIWYG mode editor (GWT-based vs. CKEditor) > > > > > > > > > > I'm leaning towards option (A). WDYT? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Marius > > _______________________________________________ > > devs mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
