Am 2019-11-23 um 16:50 schrieb Mojca Miklavec <mojca.miklavec.li...@gmail.com>: > > On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 at 16:40, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote: >>> Am 2019-11-23 um 15:14 schrieb Mojca Miklavec: >>> On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 at 13:02, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote: >>>>> Am 2019-11-23 um 08:12 schrieb Mojca Miklavec: >>>>>> >>>>>> Then you can use one of the online JS editors like CKeditor.\ >>>>> >>>>> Only if you spend an enormous amount of effort making sure that the >>>>> code is properly cleaned up rather than containing a gazillion random >>>>> html style tags which you can never reconstruct back into some >>>>> structured form. >>>> >>>> Don’t exaggerate. Or maybe your company didn’t think about which tags are >>>> really necessary. >>>> A proper configuration that doesn’t allow nonsense, even if users paste >>>> text from Word documents, is not such a big effort. >>> >>> I'm not exaggerating, I would gladly be convinced/proved that I'm >>> wrong. How much effort (expressed in hours or days) do you think is >>> needed to implement the following? >> >> Oh, IMO that wishlist is very demanding. I’d say it’s more or less >> impossible with any HTML editor. > > So where do we stand with "you are exaggerating, it's really simple", > then? How many hours to configure it? ;)
I was thinking about text (articles, literature), you were thinking about complex material. The first is simple, the latter is, well, at least complex. > (ConTeXt has no problems doing all that, and asciidoc as potential > input format supports all the required features as well; But that’s structured input; I thought we were talking about HTML editors. HTML is only well structured (in a general sense, not XML) if you write it this way manually or if you severely limit the user of an editor. > if a nice > translation layer is defined, one can get both awesome html out of the > box as well as high quality PDF. I'm just saying that I find MCE > somewhat useless. Whether or not that's exaggerating ... still waiting > to be proven wrong.) MCE is a known example, but probably not the best for every purpose. Also a matter of taste... >> The JS editors I know of allow for custom menus, and it should be easy to >> setup special divs for these warning sections. >> I don’t know any good table or formula editors/plugins, though. I’m not up >> to date, but I guess with a graphical/“WYSIWYG” tool you’ll never get >> perfectly structured input and will never be able to address finer details >> of typography, esp. WRT math. > > Well ... both Word and Open/LibreOffice do a pretty decent job w.r.t > math nowadays, MathJax is awesome, and I've also seen some awesome > javascript apps allowing you to edit equations. So it's not > impossible. Just not that straightforward … Since I seldom need formulae, I got no experience with those. Last time I had to use Word’s formula editor it was horrible, but that was in 2005 or so, and Microsoft did their homework since. I guess it’s still easier to write TeX code than clicking formulae together. > I'm not saying that I really need a WYSIWYG editor. Anyone who's > supposed to enter correct complex formulas should be able to learn > some basic markup language (I guess). I agree. Best, Hraban ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________
