Soon to Be Released CKEditor 4 Features New Skin And Inline Editing 69
PsxMeUP writes "CKEditor, one of the world's most popular WYSIWYG HTML editors, is getting a new default skin. The winner, Rafal Bromirski, will also receive $1000. The new design is going with the trendy monochrome look. The skin will be used with the soon-to-be-released CKEditor 4, which will feature inline editing."
I recommend checking out the inline editing demo. Who needs textarea any more?
Re:Slashvertising. (Score:4, Informative)
To simplify Open Source community involvement and development, CKEditor 4 is now hosted on GitHub, the popular git community site.
OK.
Re:Slashvertising. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'd MUCH rather use Notepad - not even Notepad2 or Notepad++, vim, pico, nano
This is an inline replacement for textarea. It has nothing to do with those.
Re: (Score:2)
Every web WYSIWYG produces garbage markup, that's why I hate them. They're supposed to make HTML easier for plebians, but in reality they're given the power to make incomprehensible messes. Like handing a loaded shotgun to a toddler.
At least what CK produces (and FCK before it) is less fubar'd than what TinyMCE vomits out.
Inline editing is a recipe for an infinite amount of "I edited the page, and now it's broken" support requests. Only rabidly masochistic developers would even think of deploying it anyw
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
It is actually the browser that creates most of the garbage. The editor mostly uses an API to tell the browser that a certain part of the page is editable.
Re:Slashvertising. + Grammar Fail (Score:2, Funny)
Never heard of CKEditor and I could care less....
"could NOT care less". Please, if you're going to troll, do it properly.
More Gray?? (Score:2, Insightful)
Seriously, what is wrong with color in a UI?
Re: (Score:1)
Color?! What are you? Some kind of communist?
Re: (Score:2)
It can be persisted in exactly the same way as a WYSIWYG textarea replacement within a tradiitonal CMS does it - using Javascript and AJAX to pass the content to your backend. Makes very little difference whether the data comes from a textarea or from another DOM element / Javscript variable.
Re: (Score:2)
And I've looked around their beta site for documentation showing me how to do it. Because, you know, CKEditor just might be most interesting to developers, who kind of like to see code and understand how the integration is going to work and all that.
But no. Lots of demos, no example of showing you how to do the AJAX calls. Uh... they DO have a built-in functionality for that, don't they? If I have to code all that up by hand, then please explain to me how this new feature makes it in any way better than usi
Monochrome (Score:2)
I for one will be glad when monochrome is passé; I'm surprised Google still has its multicolor logo, for all its embraced this trend. Vive les couleurs!
Re: (Score:2)
Cool (Score:2)
In other news - I can see people misusing the inline editing feature. Tons of bugs and user frustration commencing in 3...2...1...
Slashvertisment? (Score:1)
Oh no! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Textareas do have the advantage of being accessible too, to those using screen readers and the like.
Inline editing has lots of advantages too though, so maybe the perfect CMS way of doing things would be to have both options - inline editing for typical end users, and textarea (both plain and WYSIWYG replacements) for accessibility purposes.
CKEditor is like TinyMCE (Score:1)
CKEditor is like TinyMCE. Tiny has a lot better documentation and CK, formerly known as FCK, changed their inner workings a couple of years ago without having a solid stable branch. We changed to Tiny.
Noooooooooo! (Score:2, Insightful)
Thank $DEITY this is an option. (It is an option, right?) A bit of color is a GOOD thing. With monochromatic icons, you need to inspect each icon carefully to discern its shape. With color, your eyes can quickly jump to the right one, especially if you've used it for a while. It just becomes automatic, like muscle memory.
The old icons were great. The ones that were just for text were black (bold, ital, underline, left/right/center). Text+decoration were black and colored (lists, indent, super/subscript). Se
Re:Noooooooooo! (Score:5, Insightful)
With color, your eyes can quickly jump to the right one...
Which is great for people with color sight. As a colorblind person I can testify that this is of no use to me whatsoever. Now, before you 'color' (<- clever, no?) me an activist lemme just say that this is not a big deal to me, I'm comfortable in my disability and am not advocating some kind of radical, PETA-esque change in society. But your very first statement; "With monochromatic icons, you need to inspect each icon carefully to discern its shape.", well, sorry but I just don't find this to be too much of a burden. Yes, I do it as a matter of course. But do you REALLY need the extra help?
I like the trend to less chromatic styles, its helps me and I believe it lends itself to a more streamlined, uniform look for all of us. Its hardly anything to get activist about, but like the 2nd law I tend to less complexity anyway.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, the fact of the matter is that far more people are not colorblind than are. Those who are not can use these extra color hints to do what we want to do quicker. Do we absolutely need color? No, we don't, but that doesn't mean we should just forego color altogether when there is a proven benefit to it because ~9% of others can't discern the same differences. I know you said you aren't trying to make the whole societal change argument; I merely am responding to the piece of text suggesting we don't need
Re:Noooooooooo! (Score:4, Insightful)
I knew someone would bring this up. No, it's not much of a burden, but if color makes it better for fully-sighted people (who, by the way, greatly outnumber people with any amount or kind of color blindness -- not that we're therefore more important, it's simply a question of what does the most good for the most people) then why not leave it in? Plus it's not like I'm advocating making a TV louder, which would help a hearing-impaired person watch a show but would cause discomfort for others. If something helps one group and has no impact on another, why not do it?
Totally blind people can't see icons at all. Does that mean the icons should be replaced with BOLD ITALIC UNDERLINE STRIKETHROUGH NUMBERED LIST BULLETED LIST INDENT OUTDENT SUBSCRIPT SUPERSCRIPT TEXT COLOR HIGHLIGHT COLOR MAKE LINK BREAK LINK LEFT ALIGN CENTER RIGHT ALIGN so you have the same experience a blind person has with a screen reader? After all, it's not much of a burden on you, right?
That's what separates something that is merely "usable" from things that are truly "good" -- a thousand little details, all adding up to a better experience. Is this the end of the world? No. Is it a step backwards? Yes.
Re: (Score:2)
Totally blind people can't see icons at all.
Specious argument. The totally blind don't even figure into this caclulus, so I'm going to completely disregard your little "fit" and again argue that simplicity is a better way to go. Might as well get the shoe to fit as many people as possible in my opinion.
Re: (Score:3)
You want things to be equally bad for everyone, whereas I want things to be as good as possible for as many as possible. Sorry, but your way makes no sense. Presenting colorful icons to colorblind users does not harm them in any way, but its an enhancement for fully-sighted users. Colorful icons don't "not fit" colorblind users. (Sorry for the double negative there -- not proper English but there's not a word that's the opposite of "fit".) This isn't like the difference between sounds that are too loud or n
Re: (Score:2)
> Try taking one of your existing colourful setups, randomise the icon
> positions, then see how quickly you get used to the new layout. I'd
> wager there wouldn't be much difference between that and getting
> used to the new grey icons.
I've already done that, effectively, and color is indeed key. I work with several rich text editors daily (personal blog, work CMS, school's LMS, and more, plus random web forms, blog comment forms, etc., in addition to Word, Excel, and other local apps) and each ha
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it's just an option. The monochrome theme is just one you can choose from and presumably the default as of this new version. You can choose a colour theme if you prefer, or make your own. Try the demo [ckeditor.com] linked to in the summary, it uses a colour theme.
The focus of this story shouldn't be the new theme (it looks nice to me but not really a big deal) but the new functionality this version brings, mainly being the inline editing.
Aww man.. (Score:2)
You're telling me I need to stop using HotDog to manage my websites?!
Who needs it? (Score:2)
Who needs textarea any more?
Slashdot?
So what do I use on the Desktop? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Some Features: code-highlighting, code-folding, auto-complete, tag-matching, regex search/replace.
Default View is "code" but it also includes "Preview Mode" (WYSIWYG) and Inspector -- a mix between CodeView/Preview/FileView : personally I don't find Inspector all that useful, but the rest is decent.
CLPHP can (a
The inline editor is awesome! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think the reason why this does not yet exist is because the builders of websites which support it don't want their images in the middle of the text. Browsers which support HTML5 do support drag&drop so I wouldn't be surprised if it is possible al though I'm not yet sure how that would integrate (well).
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
CKEditor smells like Cowboy Neal (Score:2)
When did this happen?
Much as I appreciate your humorous intentional misunderstanding, some people *might* think you're being serious and get the wrong idea. So let's clear this up...
"CKEditor" is the latest fragrance from Calvin Klein, the people who brought you "CKOne".
There- I hope that corrects any misleading impression given.
Very nice tool (Score:1)
Still, I can't help but look at the latest trend to blocky monochrome icons and flash back to Mac 64 and Windows 2.
Re: (Score:2)
Lovely (Score:2)
LOVELY! your work is going to be everywhere, shortly. HTML5 is the future, afterall. You guys rock!
What does this do that Amaya doesn't? (Score:2)
This is a sincere question, by a naive end-user...
http://www.w3.org/Amaya/ [w3.org]
open-source, and efficient even to me...
Re: (Score:1)
it runs in a browser
amaya runs on the client