On 11 Jan 2016 at 15:08:12, vincent(a)massol.net
(vincent@massol.net(mailto:vincent@massol.net)) wrote:
Note that if the admin doesn’t want to show multiple
editors to its user, he should not install multiple editors either :)
(ofc there’s a problem right now in that the current editor is not an extension that you
can uninstall).
For advanced users, I still think it’s best to show all the active editors (in addition
to the default which is set by the admin - We could have “(Default)” next to it in the
menu. With UC3 the admin can decide whether he wants to make only 1 editor avail or
several.
Which is kind of nice if you want to let your users testdrive some new editor (such as the
Realtime one for example - it’d be a pain to have to go back to the your profile and
constantly switch back and forth between editors)
Thanks
Vincent
Thanks
-Vincent
On 11 Jan 2016 at 14:52:46, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica)
(valicac@gmail.com(mailto:valicac@gmail.com)) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I prefer B: I prefer to have things simpler for the user, while providing
> power to the administrator.
>
> There can be multiple extensions that integrate themselves inside that menu
> (like the real-time editor) but I don't see that as a benefit for the user,
> but more confusing about all the types of editors.
>
> We already have 3 modes: WYSIWYG, Wiki, Inline + Objects + Class .... we
> need to find ways to simplify that, rather than adding more things in the
> menu (even if only for advanced users).
>
> The administrator should select the preferred editor from Configuration -
> Edit Mode Settings - Editor - Default Editor (for the farm or per wiki).
> The user will use the default value provided by admin or overwrite it from
> his User Preferences (if he is advanced and knows about the existence of
> multiple editors).
> By default we should select the recommended editor to be used and this
> should be changed just in exceptional / desired cases.
>
> Having multiple editors available is not something a normal user would care
> about and doesn't provide additional/different benefits for the user.
> Important is to provide the best tool by default.
>
> When adding the CKEditor first you will need to configure the wiki in order
> to use it. After a testing period we can change the default editor if we'd
> like.
>
> Off topic: I think that the Page syntax preference in the Document
> Information should be removed. There are not that many variations between
> 2.0 and 2.1 and I don't see why a normal user would care or want to chance
> the syntax. The users should rely on the default/recommended and the
> default is configured from Administration.
>
> Comment A: "GWT WYSIWYG" that would look super cryptic :)
>
> Thanks,
> Caty
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:27 PM, vincent(a)massol.net
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 11 Jan 2016 at 14:16:40, Marius Dumitru Florea (
> > mariusdumitru.florea@xwiki.com(mailto:mariusdumitru.florea@xwiki.com))
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 2:00 PM, vincent(a)massol.net
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Marius,
> > > >
> > > > I prefer to think in term of use cases. Here are the ones I see as
> > > > important on this topic and that I think we need to ensure that we
> > > > implement:
> > > >
> > > > UC1: Ability for admins to install an extension that contributes a
new
> > > > editor
> > > > UC2: Ability for admins to select which editor is the default editor
> > for
> > > > their users in a given wiki (note that ideally this configuration
> > should be
> > > > per wiki for the farm use case)
> > > > UC3: Ability for admins to decide which editors are active (i.e.
which
> > > > editors users will be able to configure or use). For example it
should
> > be
> > > > possible to completely replace the GWT-based WYSIWYG by CKEeditor
and
> > > > preventing any user from using the GWT-based WYSIWYG editor.
> > > > UC4: Ability for a user (simple or advanced) to explicitly decide
which
> > > > default editors he/she’ll use (in his/her user profile probably).
> > Should
> > > > override the editor selected in UC2 (but they should only see
editors
> > that
> > > > are active, cf UC3)
> > > > UC5: Ability for an advanced user to choose on the spot (on-demand)
the
> > > > editor to use to edit a given page, bypassing the default editor.
> > Should
> > > > override the editor selected in UC4.
> > > >
> > > > WDYT?
> > > >
> > >
> > > All these use cases are covered by both A and B so it doesn't help me
> > > choose one or the other. My question is more how to implement these use
> > > cases: using A or B?
> >
> > Ok cool if they’re covered by A and B (it wasn’t mentioned in your email…).
> >
> > Note that currently there’s no default choice anymore for advanced users
> > when they edit a page and we’d need to put that back (that’s UC4).
> >
> > Apart from this, I think I prefer A) than B).
> >
> > Thanks
> > -Vincent
> >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > -Vincent
> > > >
> > > > On 11 Jan 2016 at 12:31:12, Marius Dumitru Florea (
> > > >
mariusdumitru.florea@xwiki.com(mailto:mariusdumitru.florea@xwiki.com))
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi devs,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm working on integrating CKEditor in XWiki and I'm
wondering how
> > the
> > > > Edit
> > > > > menu should reflect the fact that there are multiple editors
> > available. I
> > > > > see two options:
> > > > >
> > > > > (A) List all the available content editors in the Edit menu
(note
> > that
> > > > the
> > > > > menu is visible only for advanced users). E.g. Wiki, GWT
WYSIWYG,
> > > > CKEditor
> > > > >
> > > > > PROS:
> > > > > * easier to implement (because there is already an UIX for
this)
> > > > > * easier to discover new content editors (e.g. after an admin
> > installs an
> > > > > extension that provides a content editor)
> > > > > * ability to try a different content editor than the one
configured
> > (i.e.
> > > > > without updating the configuration)
> > > > >
> > > > > CONS:
> > > > > * the (advanced) user might not know, at first, which content
editor
> > to
> > > > > choose from the Edit menu
> > > > > * once the user has a preferred editor the other content editor
> > entries
> > > > > become noise (the user may want to hide them)
> > > > >
> > > > > (B) List only the edit modes in the Edit menu. E.g. Wiki,
WYSIWYG
> > > > >
> > > > > PROS:
> > > > > * easier to choose the edit mode (wiki/source vs. WYSIWYG)
> > > > > * less crowded Edit menu (easier to scan, no noise)
> > > > >
> > > > > CONS:
> > > > > * the user needs to edit his profile to discover the available
> > editors
> > > > for
> > > > > Wiki/WYSIWYG modes
> > > > > * harder to try the new content editors (you need to update the
> > > > > configuration)
> > > > >
> > > > > Let's see what we need for each option:
> > > > >
> > > > > (A) Needs:
> > > > > * UIX in the Edit menu (already available)
> > > > > * 1 configuration option
("editing.content.defaultEditor") to
> > configure
> > > > the
> > > > > default editor (at farm/wiki/space/user level). We can probably
> > extend
> > > > the
> > > > > "Default editor to use" preference from the user
profile to show all
> > the
> > > > > available content editors.
> > > > >
> > > > > (B) Needs:
> > > > > * 3 configuration options:
> > > > > ** default edit mode (Wiki vs. WYSIWYG), already available in
the
> > user
> > > > > profile
> > > > > ** default Wiki mode editor (only one editor for now so we can
skip
> > it)
> > > > > ** default WYSIWYG mode editor (GWT-based vs. CKEditor)
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm leaning towards option (A). WDYT?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Marius
> > _______________________________________________
> > devs mailing list
> > devs(a)xwiki.org
> >
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
> >
> _______________________________________________
> devs mailing list
> devs(a)xwiki.org
>
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs