11 Jan
2016
11 Jan
'16
2:59 p.m.
Regarding the configuration options we could use select > optgroup in order
to list multiple WYSIWYG editors, or just simply list their names.
Thanks,
Caty
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <
valicac(a)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 <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:
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
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? > 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