17 Jan
2009
17 Jan
'09
11:36 a.m.
On Jan 17, 2009, at 10:54 AM, Pascal Voitot wrote:
Some questions arising in my head:
do you want to make the WYSIWYG the cornerstone of XWiki online
editing or
is it only the XWiki2.0 syntax editor?
do you want to make multi-syntax a key feature of XWiki or is it
only a
facility provided so that people can use easily XWiki and when they
are used
to it, they will naturally begin to use XWIki2.0 syntax?
If WYSIWYG is used only with XWiki2.0 syntax, it might look like you
are
strongly encouraging people to use XWIki2.0 syntax instead of other
syntaxes. Is it a good or bad strategy? I don't know... to be
discussed :)
IMO we must strongly encourage people to use the xwiki 2.0 syntax and
the other syntaxes are only a facility (at least for now and the
foreseeable future IMO). Reasons:
1) it's hard to fix all parsers for all syntaxes
2) other syntaxes are all way less powerful than the xwiki syntax.
3) there are issues with links in other syntaxes. For ex the ability
to link to multi wikis which doesn't exist in most syntaxes so they'll
only offer a very small subset of xwiki linking features and you
wouldn't be able to link between wikis. Unless we extend other
syntaxes of course (need to find syntax for doing that and write link
parsers for that)
4) the new wysiwyg only works well with the 2.0 syntax
5) We'd need to write syntax renderers for all syntaxes if we want
them to be equal to the xwiki 2.0 one but if we do so then we have the
issues raised in 2).
As time progresses we'll probably improve other syntax support but
right now we must encourage people to use the xwiki 2.0 syntax as much
as possible and consider the other syntaxes as migration strategies IMO.
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
Pascal
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just realized that our new WYSIWYG editor will only work fine with
> our
> xwiki 2.0 syntax since other wiki syntaxes are less powerful and
> won't
> be able to express some complex structures (like embedding a document
> inside a table cell) or simply like styling a portion of text.
>
> Of course this is not a problem of the wysiwyg editor per see but in
> practice it means that users using it for other syntaxes when they
> save will get a different rendered result.
>
> So I"m tempted to say that our GWT editor will only work for the
> xwiki
> 2.0 syntax and that for the other syntaxes users will have to use the
> wiki editor.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent