What's the problem with TinyMCE?

Remo, there really is no particular problem with TinyMCE. Simply put, FCKEditor seems more powerful (e.g. tables). Perhaps I have to set a switch I am not aware of?

Amazing.

We actually /used/ to use FCKeditor in concrete v4. We've been through a handful of these little wysiwyg editors over the years and we've found quite frankly, they all suck in one way or another.

I think it's just a huge challenge to pull off. Certainly in the hands of someone who knows HTML they're okay (although often add crap that is annoying) but in the hands of someone who has a hard time in Word but DOES want well formed HTML - they're all a nightmare...

When we made the choice to move over to tinyMCE we did it because we actually thought it did less, but did it a little better. We found a lot of weird edge cases in FCKeditor, things like if you select text from right to left instead of left to right the tags would get funky, etc...

That being said, we also realized folks would have their own tastes, so we figured other editors could be released as add-on blocks easily enough.

The only lesson I'd share with ya, is go the way we did on tinyMCE or Wordpress does in their interface : make the c5 hooks their own toolbar. It is a little annoying having both an image icon in tinyMCE and a "place image" icon in the c5 toolbar above it, but trying to do a deeper integration (which we did before) means that upgrading to deal with the constant patches these editors get is a nightmare..

gluck! It's bound to happen eventually, kudos if you wanna be it's champion

I don't know what the problem is with a deeper integration.

The way you can write FCKEditor extension is quite easy. It is similar to c5, you can update fckedit without losing your extensions as long as you use your own config file.

I did this twice and never had a lot of problems. Well, it was a bit difficult to pass data to the fckedit dialog. Couldn't use get or post parameters and therefore had to use sessions.

Means if you open two editors at the same time you gets messy ;-) But beside that this should be quite easy..

Sounds like a good challenge to me :D
But I don't need anything beside TinyMCE, there's not problem with it and therefore I try to do other things with c5 first.

oh, by all means to the most elegant integration possible..

I'm just saying, its real easy to find your self tweaking out the fck image edit interface, adding tabs there and to the link interface...

it quickly becomes a nightmare to update later...

well maybe not a nightmare, lets put it this way - its a job. is it a job worth your time?
;)
-frz

TinyMCE is the perfect editor for Concrete5. Lets the user do JUST enough! ;-)

it's just about the last sentence you wrote ;-) it's not worth the time...

I fully understand your point. Perhaps implementing a set of layouts in the template can be the way to go...

do you mean style sheets (css) by layouts?

you have layouts but I would call them page types..

but I like the idea of having a file where I could define n-style sheet classes which later could be selected by the user in TinyMCE!

I'm leaning towards the FCK editor too. Though the reasons are admittedly not that great. My one C5 gripe so far is the lack of an image editor. I like a custom one built for FCK.

http://www.saulmade.nl/FCKeditorFCKPlugins.php...

Any plans for an advanced image editor (crop, resize...) in C5?

Or does anyone know of an equivalent that can be integrated into tiny?

Other ideas?

we want to incorporate an image editor into the next major rev of the file manager...

scale, crop, possibly pass a "hot spot" so as a developer you can define a X,Y width and give the site owner the ability to position and size the image they want where it needs to go....

play with the icon editor on this site. something like that.