Comments on: WYSIWYG editor spec – layouts

By: Lawrence Ladomery

Lawrence Ladomery — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 11:56:49 +0000

I would let text styles / formatting off the hook

Have you come across any web 2.0 type widgets used in with WYSIWYG interfaces, to allow the building and inclusion of more complex objects?

By: AlastairC

AlastairC — Wed, 04 Apr 2007 00:48:59 +0000

I can see that for complex objects (although tables is pushing it), but what about headings, lists, and inline styles such as bold and links?

I don’t see those as easy things to add in a forms based situation.

By: Lawrence Ladomery

Lawrence Ladomery — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 17:21:42 +0000

Perhaps by making available a wider range of templates for the same content type of page?

And if there isn’t a template available then go through the process of creating a new one, which is a useful exercise anyway.

I think of tables, images, flash animations and content items as ‘objects’ to embed in a page and not ones that should be built in a page. Ideally they would be kept as separate entities in the CMS (added using specific tools and properly categorized / meta tagged) and included on a page when required.

By: AlastairC

AlastairC — Fri, 01 Dec 2006 00:35:15 +0000

Hi Lawrence,

One of my assumed requirements (because clients tend to require it) is that they can apply styles, images, tables etc.

How do you fulfil that for non-technical users with a forms based editor?

By: Lawrence Ladomery

Lawrence Ladomery — Thu, 30 Nov 2006 17:05:10 +0000

This is probably the closest one can get to a WYSIWYG that can be made available to occasional/accidental content managers – ie people within an organisation that have been tasked with publishing copy to a website (and who tend not to care and resent the role).

But I still feel strongly that it’s better to separate style from the content manager via a form based CMS.