Posted by wmostrey on December 5, 2007 at 10:24pm
It's very important that DrupalMU ships with a WYSIWYG. If we want to make things as easy as possible, this would mean that using TinyMCE or FCKeditor is out of the question: we can't have our user download an extra package from an external site, put it in a specific location and then do some more configuration.
Update I think I found a perfect candidate for a WYSIWYG shipping with DrupalMU: BUEditor (thanks Michelle!). It requires no extra libraries to be installed, has a teaser break and it integrates with IMCE!
Comments
Htmlarea
I vote for Htmlarea because it is simple and easy. What I always liked about Wordpress was the simple formatting - you don't need to much fancy formatting in a blog.
And Htmlarea does handle images very nice.
Best regards
Stefan
no htmlarea
Thanks a lot for your reply, this is exactly the feedback I'm looking for. I just tried the Htmlarea module and it appears it does require 3rd party software to be installed (this is not mentioned on the project page) so currently we're down to two options. If anyone knows any more good wysiwygs that don't require extra downloads, please post them here.
Why not write a module which automatically downloads TinyMCE?
If the TinyMCE cannot be bundled because of the incompatible license, why can't a module be written to automate the download, installation, and configuration of TinyMCE? This module could be made part of core, and it would effectively make TinyMCE reliable as a core component.
Let me add that the WYSIWIG editor which should be a part of core Drupal should be more than a simple rich text editor.
It must have support for LAYOUT (i.e. HTML tables) and IMAGES (i.e. select from the "files" upload directory).
This is because it needs to work for Pages, not just Stories.
EXAMPLE:
I just set a Drupal site up for my sister on her web hosting account (Drupal core only, no ssh access, so no contrib modules).
It is basically a static web site for her restaurant.
She wants to create ten or so pages on a flat nav menu and update those pages periodically.
She is going to have to know a painful amount of HTML to get her site to look decent.
The WYSIWIG editor she needs is one which supports her LAYOUT and IMAGE needs.
P.S. While we're at it, can this module please manage the download and installation of any contrib module or theme from Drupal.org?
GPL?
I'm not sure if an automatic download is allowed in terms of licensing. It's not allowed to distribute TinyMCE because it isn't GPL. If this isn't the case and this method is allowed, then that would be great! I'd love to have some confirmation of someone who's more at home in this. I might mail the development mailing list on this if no answer comes up here.
TInyMCE is GPL
TinyMCE is GPLed -- here's the link:
http://drupal.org/node/124978
I googled "drupal 3rd party library" and found this article which sets forth the Drupal's policies toward including 3rd party libraries in Drupal's cvs repository.
If I remember right, TinyMCE was once included in the TinyMCE module but was taken out for several of the reasons mentioned in the article above. I'm sure you could search for the debate around that switch.
I'm no expert on this but I think automatic downloading of code is generally frowned upon. Apparently making that process robust and secure is very complex -- which, btw is why Drupal still doesn't have an automatic updating mechanism.
Kyle Mathews
Kyle Mathews
Wordpress again
As I see, TinyMCE ist shipped with Wordpress.
So there shouldn't be a legal issue with that.
And obviously it is possible to make TinyMCE look really simple. The default appearance with all possible formatting-options looks really confusing.
So, well then, I would vote for TinyMCE, too! :-)
Stefan
Including 3rd party libraries
I'm starting to lean towards that solution as well yeah. There's a new GHOP task that compares all current solutions, I'm looking forward to see what that will turn up.
It's definitely something to
It's definitely something to investigate because there is a distinct possibility that an official agreement has been made between the Wordpress and TinyMCE camps.
How so?
Do you have some information on this agreement? I've never heard something about this and I wonder how such an agreement would work license-wise.
No
No agreement, it's all open source, they can do what they like.
The official word from Drupal CVS is that our policy is to NOT include third party libraries in our CVS tree, regardless of their license.
Recall, the entire size of the codebase from TinyMCE (which is actively developed and maintained in the Moxiecode source repository) would be massive inside our CVS, never mind the issue of then having to keep two code bases in sync, when really you just want the newest stable library from TinyMCE directly.
We've checked it into our Bryght repo (see http://svn.bryght.com/dev/browser/bryghtbase/) so it works out of the box. If anyone wants to host a one click download, I recommend the same thing.
For the record, I still think TinyMCE is the best of a bad bunch. TinyMCE is also undergoing a rewrite to a more modern implementation, so that's what I would likely transition to. Many of these other WYSIWYGs are now starting to use a centrally cached js library, so no download is necessary. I expect this is where most will end up...
BUEditor
I think I found a perfect candidate for a WYSIWYG shipping with DrupalMU: BUEditor (thanks Michelle!). It requires no extra libraries to be installed, has a teaser break and it integrates with IMCE!
WYSIWYG
Well, BUEditor is not exactly what I would call WYSIWIG. That's more or less the "code"-Tab in the wordpress-WYSIWYG-Editor and for "the real dump" user, I would assume this is already too much.
Well I like its simplicity.
Well I like its simplicity. It's really simple and lightweight, it has a preview button and it doesn't require an extra library. Especially that final point is important to me. But I understand your point, and my mind isn't made up yet.
Not WYSIWYG, better ;-)
I love BUEditor, but it is not at all WYSIWIG. It is, I think, straightforward and easy enough to convince people they don't need to use WYSIWYG. Even if Drupal had a fantastic WYSIWYG, I'd encourage people to use real HTML.
But people will sill want "What You See Is What You Get," and we should try to have the best of that too-- the key for me is that the WYSIWYG produce code that can be edited without the WYSIWIG editor-- and the ability to switch back and forth in the window. Playing nice with BUEditor would be a good benchmark for any WYSIWYG candidates.
benjamin, Agaric Design Collective
benjamin, agaric
Live preview
I think this must be the most elegant solution I've seen this far: the live module. It's the module that generates the live preview that is used on the comment fields here on g.d.o. It would be great to use this in combination with for instance the BUEditor.
HtmlBox
I just stumbled over HtmlBox and on the first glance it did make a really good impression. Simple, not bloated and easy to use.
Unfortunately I didn't found anything about that at drupal.org.