Redactor - javascript (jQuery) WYSIWYG editor
redactorjs.com
redactorjs.com
I would love to make it simpler to insert iPad images. Basically make the upload intermediate step not visible. Unfortunately it is not possible to upload images from the iPad.
edit: unfortunately copy past doesn't work on iPad. The selection is difficult and the copy is simply ignored. Past inserts whatever is in the clipboard.
If you copy text in another place, it gets stored in the clipboard and the past operation works as expected. If you copy text selected in the editor text area, the clipboard is left unchanged. Pasting gives you whatever was in the clipboard.
So trying to copy text from the editor text area and pasting it in another app or place doesn't work since it's the copy operation that doesn't work.
The text selection is also not working as expected since it behaves slightly differently than other iPad text editable text field. But this is not a real problem.
http://new.squarespace.com/ <- about halfway through demo video.
Shouldn't it be <strong></strong> ?
Semantic HTML + CSS can be taken too far, but having separate layers gives you a lot more flexibility than presentational HTML alone, which tends to be very brittle.
Meanwhile, the whole concept of using italics for emphasis is a Western idea. CJK languages, for example, don't use italics for emphasis, and most of their italic fonts actually look terrible on screen.
In HTML5, <i> and <b> now have the deliberately vague semantic definitions of "alternate voice" and "stylistically offset" – this could cover emphasis, book/film names, key words, foreign phrases, etc. Incorrect use of the more specific semantic tags (eg. generating <em> when the user sets a film title to "italic") is worse than a lack of semantic detail.
HTML5 was designed with the understanding that not all web content can be authored by someone who knows the correct use of semantic HTML tags like <cite>, <em>, <strong>, <mark>, etc. Application-level copy can use those tags, but a rich text editor (for normal people) can't know which one is appropriate, so it should always default to the vague ones, <b> and <i>.
Edit: Redactor looks like it retains formatting for the HTML. That's enough to make me switch.
- No way of adding headings? * edit: sorry it's under styles.
- Clicking bold, italic etc should expand the selection to the word that the cursor is in.
- Setting formatting should restore the cursor to the editing area
- Clicking into a formatted area should toggle the buttons in the toolbar that apply
- image alignment a little clunky. Why not add a simple overlay for align centre|left|right on mouseover?
On the plus side image resizing is done well.
One thing that annoys me no end is that all editors I've ever used apply block level formatting (h1,2,3 etc) for an entire paragraph when only a sentence is selected. The most intuitive approach would be to break the sentence out of the paragraph and style only it. As a user I expect what I have highlighted to change not all of the surrounding text as well!
These things aren't easy to get right, especially cross browser. I recently put together an editor to exactly suit my needs (uses contenteditable instead of an iframe), but it's chrome, firefox and ie9+(? i think) only. Trying to get something usable across legacy browsers is ridiculously hard.
They were indeed hard to create and (at least then) relied on a detailed know of the browser and platform's characteristics.
But given the varying tasks which call for that kind of editor, what I'd really like to see is a small semi-standard tool or framework for the construction of such editors. As it is now, one must either use an existing tool having too many or too few features or go to the great lengths of modifying one.
This seems really promising at first. Would love to try it soon but it really needs a public repo. English documentation would be a great plus too! :)
Full disclosure, I'm the primary author.
They do sometimes produce really terrible HTML though, especially because people copy/paste from MS Word and it results in a bunch of garbage.
Markdown is not a standardize encoding. Many markdown editors don't support tables for instance.
Finally, as an editor, it lacks the easiness to add images and such. They need to be uploaded in a web server.
It thus has significant limitations before it can be considered a serious rich text alternative.
I do use it and I would love it had a better support because it is easy. What I like is that when writing we focus on the text, not the formating. Formatting is implicit.
Ran into a bug though, if you insert a table then return twice after it, all content below the table is removed..
some confusion on licenses - MIT is available but with a caveat and I don't think you can do that.
Edit: This goes to the lack of English docs, not to your misunderstanding I'm sure.
Dual licensed under the MIT or GPL Version 2 licenses.
2. Because it doesn't use inline styles
3. Because it produces valid html5 markup
4. Because it's proven end tested in Basecamp Next
5. Because it's made by Xing
On the other hand, full-screen mode is really cool.
But, a problem: Tapping Bold with no text highlighted (the expectation is that whatever you type next is bold) not only doesn’t work, but steals focus and you lose your cursor
You should not consider this library production-ready!
Surely you kid, this is the nicest one I am to see come out yet. File a bug mate.
That was the primary reason that made me start http://hallojs.org
AGPL is a new license, and so there are few examples of how it affects things in practice. Many developers (especially ones building open source under less-strict license) prefer to keep their distance.
The goal of the AGPL was to keep people from modifying GPL programs that were essential on the backend, but then keep their modifications hidden. With the normal GPL, if you don't distribute a binary, you don't have to release your code. With the AGPL, the goal was to force people to also release backend code. But code licenses start to get very shaky when we aren't talking about binary-linked modules.
I have a fairly typical internet connection, and I can download 40 MEGABYTES in about 8 seconds.