Yea, another annoying feature of the FCKeditor is it trying to make sense of what it does
not understand, like some extension tags, leading it to mangle them, like replacing <
and > with > and <. If your users are going to use an extension's
features and FCKeditor is going to mangle them then this may be a real issue. I use the
Inputbox but I tend to be the only one editing those pages and I normally use wikitext as
my default editor.
Still, overall, the FCKeditor is accepted pretty well here but we only add extensions to a
wiki when a user requests it. Normally only Cite and FCKeditor are added, and FCKeditor
understands and uses Cite. I've installed various Calendar extensions, Widgets, and
CategoryTree with no complaints but that doesn't mean the users have run into all the
possible problems.
-Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: David Gerard [mailto:dgerard@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 2:35 PM
To: MediaWiki announcements and site admin list
Subject: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Least-worst present WYSIWYG solution?
On 10 February 2011 19:24, Sullivan, James (NIH/CIT) [C]
<sullivan(a)mail.nih.gov> wrote:
The FCKeditor does not handle these image attributes,
just size, position and caption, which was my only point about links, and yes, I consider
it "fancy" since most users do not add these attributes to their images. If
they did I would be getting a lot of complaints about using the FCKeditor wrt images.
This is most promising :-D Yes, if they want to do fancy image
attributes they can use wikitext :-)
My last experiment with FCK was hampered by it messing up the tags
used by Extension:InputBox - our users are very fond of the "Create an
article!" box I put on the front page of our internal wikis, but
ediitng the page in FCK mangles it. Has anyone else encountered this?
Or even solved it?
- d.
_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
MediaWiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l