[xwiki-users] searching/replacing within the xwiki edition window
Hi all, Several users have asked me, and me myself find it quite useful, for this feature and I don't know if it is possible to find any utility doing this: Is it possible to search/replace while editing a document with the wiki editor? Working in WYSIWYG mode, it is at least possible to use the built in search utility of each browser, but this doesn't work in wiki mode. Thanks! Ricardo -- Ricardo Rodríguez Your EPEC Network ICT Team
Ricardo, that's browser dependent... Opera gives you this service (at least searching). On Macs OmniWeb gives you it if you open the external text window. For such intensive changes, using XEclipse application (or plugin) really helps. It lacks a goto-line but has a search-and-replace. I agree, however, that XWiki documentation could allocate a space about the existing solutions for this very common issue. E.g. I know there are such with BBedit on macs and Texmate... paul Le 14 févr. 08 à 13:44, [Ricardo Rodriguez] Your EPEC Network ICT Team a écrit :
Hi all,
Several users have asked me, and me myself find it quite useful, for this feature and I don't know if it is possible to find any utility doing this:
Is it possible to search/replace while editing a document with the wiki editor? Working in WYSIWYG mode, it is at least possible to use the built in search utility of each browser, but this doesn't work in wiki mode.
Thanks!
Ricardo
-- Ricardo Rodríguez Your EPEC Network ICT Team
_______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Paul Libbrecht wrote:
Ricardo,
that's browser dependent... Opera gives you this service (at least searching). On Macs OmniWeb gives you it if you open the external text window.
For such intensive changes, using XEclipse application (or plugin) really helps. It lacks a goto-line but has a search-and-replace.
I agree, however, that XWiki documentation could allocate a space about the existing solutions for this very common issue. E.g. I know there are such with BBedit on macs and Texmate...
paul
Thanks, Paul. The use of XEclipse will help me a lot. Thanks for pointing it out. But I think it is not an option for most of our users still reluctant to use the XWiki environment. And most of them are Internet Explorer, Firefox and/or Safari users! So Opera or OmniWeb are not an option so far. I don't get the point of what you are saying about BBedit and TexMate. I am using both, mainly TextMate in Mac OS X. Do you mean they could be somehow used with XWiki or XEclipse? Thanks! Best, Ricardo -- Ricardo Rodríguez Your EPEC Network ICT Team
Paul Libbrecht wrote:
Ricardo,
that's browser dependent... Opera gives you this service (at least searching). On Macs OmniWeb gives you it if you open the external text window.
Hi Paul, I've tried both, Opera in Windows and OmniWeb in Mac. I'm impressed with OmniWeb performance and the search/replace feature of the zoom window. Thanks for the tip. Best, Ricardo -- Ricardo Rodríguez Your EPEC Network ICT Team
But I think it is not an option for most of our users still reluctant to use the XWiki environment. And most of them are Internet Explorer, Firefox and/or Safari users! So Opera or OmniWeb are not an option so far.
As long as you rely on the default textarea there's nothing you can do there or? I wonder if that would not be a topic for the webAPI working group at W3C... it is a fairly common request I think. Le 14 févr. 08 à 23:51, [Ricardo Rodriguez] Your EPEC Network ICT Team a écrit :
I've tried both, Opera in Windows and OmniWeb in Mac. I'm impressed with OmniWeb performance and the search/replace feature of the zoom window. Thanks for the tip.
Cool. OmniWeb has so much good feature that I do not find its performance so good anymore (it's just that of safari). Among others the pictured-tabs are so fantastic that it really makes it easy to have dozens of windows open without loosing the overview... that makes it slow ;-)! Two other very precious features for developers: - OmniWeb has a so-called error-log where both the input and output headers can be presented... that is the only platform having that I have seen and it has helped me debug a large number of difficult cases. FireBug does it less good I feel. - OmniWeb and Opera both can "edit in place": just invoke view source... you get an editor... and that editor can let you preview. The advantage ? You are in a browser with the same origin and the same cookies... so you can experiment something client-side (e.g. changing a form's action from POST to GET) before actually changing the server. This also helped me often on badly designed web-siute.
I don't get the point of what you are saying about BBedit and TexMate. I am using both, mainly TextMate in Mac OS X. Do you mean they could be somehow used with XWiki or XEclipse? Thanks!
I can't find it anymore but I had seen James Strachan blogging about integrating Textmate for all textareas of a browser (might be it was Safari). That would bring, e.g., syntax coloring. paul
Paul Libbrecht wrote:
As long as you rely on the default textarea there's nothing you can do there or? I wonder if that would not be a topic for the webAPI working group at W3C... it is a fairly common request I think.
You are speaking fluently about topics to which I have just arrived a bunch of hours ago! :-) I do need some time to digest all this new pieces of information. In fact, I am still digesting previous pieces of information about other rather interesting XWiki related issues :-) Simile proyect related ones are my favorites. I don't know if the webAPI working group could be interested in this issue, but I think it is worth to create a Jira issue on the topic don't you think so? I agree about the usefulness of the WYSIWYG editor both as a XWiki hook for a number of users and as a must for a comfortable working environment. But at least for us the wiki editor it is by far much more important. We need users editing code (simple code, but code anyway), and for this task the integration of TextMate or whatever other editor available for Linux, Windows and Mac platforms is the key importance.
Two other very precious features for developers: - OmniWeb has a so-called error-log where both the input and output headers can be presented... that is the only platform having that I have seen and it has helped me debug a large number of difficult cases. FireBug does it less good I feel. - OmniWeb and Opera both can "edit in place": just invoke view source... you get an editor... and that editor can let you preview. The advantage ? You are in a browser with the same origin and the same cookies... so you can experiment something client-side (e.g. changing a form's action from POST to GET) before actually changing the server. This also helped me often on badly designed web-siute.
Simply great! I've been playing with Firebug for some time now, but the use of OmniWeb is much more intuitive. Although perhaps without the previous Firebug experience I'd not reach this conclusion. We try to get a balance between FOSS and commercial software here. Firefox is a great initiative. So we have a kind of "philosophical" doubt here. I am already using OmniGraffle following Vincent's advice then it seems to me that Omni Group products are going to our commercial basket. I am far curios about OmniFocus "peace of mind" :-)
I don't get the point of what you are saying about BBedit and TexMate. I am using both, mainly TextMate in Mac OS X. Do you mean they could be somehow used with XWiki or XEclipse? Thanks!
I can't find it anymore but I had seen James Strachan blogging about integrating Textmate for all textareas of a browser (might be it was Safari). That would bring, e.g., syntax coloring.
paul
Perhaps you could find what you/we are looking for here... http://macstrac.blogspot.com/search?q=TextMate Cheers! -- Ricardo Rodríguez Your EPEC Network ICT Team
participants (2)
-
[Ricardo Rodriguez] Your EPEC Network ICT Team -
Paul Libbrecht