On 16-Feb-06, at 4:45 PM, Renaud Richardet wrote:
From my stand-point, the big hurdles in our project has been
dealing with the editors. TinyMCE is the 4th one we're testing.
That's where everything gets tripped-up, cause ultimately, that's
the interface we'll be presenting the users, few of which should
know much about HTML / XML. Lenya rocks otherwise.
That's very interesting. Would you mind sharing with the list your
experiences with the editors you have been testing?
Ok, here goes.
We started with the two regulars, BitFlux and Kupu. Neither of which
made the cut cause they aren't really going to be usable by the
average individual - we're talking normal staff positions in a
department.
We then started testing FCK, which has a terrific interface and great
features, including:
1) copy from Word
2) copy to plain text
3) URL linking is very slick
Testing was going great with FCK, until we started running into
problems. They started with unordered lists and anchors. Adding an
anchor resulted in very strange behaviour - the anchors got added
multiple times within a document, and an additional rect was added to
the anchor comment. We couldn't recover from this problem and felt it
was a major problem with the code as written. A quick look at the
code made it clear to us that editing it would have been a nightmare
given the way it was written.
We also found that the code validation in FCK wasn't effective - a
page edited in FCK, then edited in source resulted in numerous code
problems, resulting in validation failures.
Next, we had issues with assets - after creating an asset, there
doesn't appear to be a way to edit the title if you've made a mistake
other than deleting the asset and adding it again. Kludgy.
Next, adding assets, like PDFs, and then linking to them from within
FCK results in them staying in the /authoring tree after publishing,
so they won't be accessible. How are we supposed to add downloadable
assets that will be moved to the /live section? This could have been
a Lenya issue though.
Our last problem occurred with Undo - it doesn't work (neither
keyboard shortcut or cute little undo button in nav), WinXP Firefox
1.5.0.1. Not good, as you can appreciate.
Our next client was TinyMCE. Very similar to FCK, but the code is
much cleaner and we didn't have the same problems as we experienced
with our FCK testing. Some of the things we're grappling with at the
moment:
1) Asset management isn't nearly as slick as FCK. You can add an
asset, but it doesn't appear in the asset list when adding images
(probably works if you buy the optional plug-in)
2) URL linking is really lacking when compared to FCK. Basically,
you have to know the URL before editing the page. FCK really has this
aspect nailed.
We're continuing our evaluation of TinyMCE and we'll see what we
determine. In the end, we have to be able to let loose our staff
people who aren't HTML'ers and need to really have that aspect of the
site abstracted. TinyMCE is close - a few more days of testing and
we'll know if we can tweak the code to our liking.
Does this help?
Derek
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
