So what you're saying is "Implement this or I won't use phpBB"? Sorry but I don't do things because people attempt to "bully" us or others into submission As for IPS, feel free to line their pockets if that's what you wish to do. Don't be shocked though when they change their licence, increase the price, drop the product, drop support or do something else they've indicated they would not do
The WYSIWYG editor itself has nothing to do with the back end permission system. Allowing/disallowing images, etc. could be handled just as it is now (indeed it would need such a system no matter what). If you wanted to prevent the user initially accessing such facilities it's a moments work to set five or so additional template vars. Thus the argument of "Well a Mod makes it impossible to upgrade" is all pretty much moot IMO.
As for this forum ... It exists for discussion of new features. It does not exist for users to have a go at each other in any shape or form because they want something and others indicate they don't. Equally it does not exist to try and "bully" us into implementing requests If that occurs topics will be locked. Not everyone will agree with ideas discussed here. We are not bound to introduce any and all requests. If these two things are kept in mind we'll all get along swimmingly.
So for one final time I say this ... we have made no decision one way or another whether to include such an editor. However I can and will say that the inclusion of such an editor is one of the few things that will not be influenced by "Me too!" or "Me neither!" posts here ... it is clear a vocal group want it, it is clear a vocal group do not want it. We've heard you, we've got the message, thanks We will weigh up the situation ourselves and you'll obvious find out if it's included or not in due time.
WYSIWYG message board?
Forum rules
Discuss features as they are added to the new version. Give us your feedback. Don't post bug reports, feature requests, support questions or suggestions here. Feature requests are closed.
Discuss features as they are added to the new version. Give us your feedback. Don't post bug reports, feature requests, support questions or suggestions here. Feature requests are closed.
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 1:18 pm
- Location: =Unallocated cases=
- Contact:
Re: WYSIWYG message board?
I am a Mac user as well, and I can understand your anger. I can also understand you would want to torch -=ET=- now for his comment regarding "inferior" browsers... -=ET=- forgets one thing though: due to the increasing popularity of Mozilla, Firefox - and Safari as well - who all follow standards more so than ever seen before, I feel that any self-respecting web designer / developer should try and follow the standards as well, in that way helping in trying to force every browser to start adhering standards.cwbullet wrote:I am offended by WYSIWYG systems that do not work with some browsers. I understand that some have poor implementation of come code, but there are ways to get them to work in all machines and most browsers. I have seen them. I only suggest restraint if PHPBB decides to go down this road and choose a system that will work with the majority of these systems and browsers.
It's absolutely appaling how the new IE browsers act lately, forcing developers/designers to create workarounds for it to work for the majority of people. Yes, IE is the most used browser, but I wouldn't say it's the most popular one. Some Javascript functions are not even recognised properly anymore! However, you can still implement those coloured scrollbars .
I am going to trust Paul when he says it won't be implemented unless it can move out of the way gracefully for browsers that are not as Javascript-powerful. At least this means phpBB won't act like vBulletin, which doesn't act gracefully at all, and just throws the "you're not part of the majority" in your face .
Strange how opensource projects always put in more effort to get everything working properly...
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 1:18 pm
- Location: =Unallocated cases=
- Contact:
Re: WYSIWYG message board?
/me puts the torch away...-=ET=- wrote:Well, for me this forum is called "New features discussion" and we do nothing more than discussing
Nobody injured or insult someone else, nobody use this or anything like that, so...
Another information: RTE seems to be compliant with Safari (for Mac)!
http://www.kevinroth.com/rte/changelog.txt" target="_blank
If it wasn't, the author should not have to fix anything for it
So it must be confirmed but if it's correct, RTE will be compliant with 96% of the browsers used now days.
Great comeback even before I posted my message -=ET=-
Re: WYSIWYG message board?
I NEVER say that and never talked about IE-only as cwbullet saidwacky_hacky wrote:...-=ET=- now for his comment regarding "inferior" browsers...
You can re-read all my posts!
I always talked of IE, Mozilla, Firefox and sometimes Netscape (at the minimum for the compatibility).
So it's not a pb of free/not free, IE/against others, Windows/against others, etc.
I also never ask Paul to add this feature. I always said that I like this feature and it would be great IMO if phpBB add it. That's all.
I hope it's possible to say that and give our own opinion.
The only time I talked about other BB was just to answer cwbullet to ask him if phpBB should never add anything because of 1, 2, or 3% of exotic browsers; because if phpBB must wait for the 100% compatibility, it will wait a very long time for many features and phpBB will never lead anything in the future as it does now.
phpBB is the best BB freeware product that's clear, and I hope it will stay the best!
And that do not mean that they must add anything too. Simply IMO this feature is a good one to add.
Once again I ALWAYS fully respect the dev team's job and the fact that THEY (and no one else) will decide what they want, when they will want
Eternal newbie
-
- Registered User
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 1:18 pm
- Location: =Unallocated cases=
- Contact:
Re: WYSIWYG message board?
Sorry, you called them "exotic" browsers... I pointed out that they are following standards and can therefore not be considered "exotic".-=ET=- wrote:I NEVER say that and never talked about IE-only as cwbullet saidwacky_hacky wrote:...-=ET=- now for his comment regarding "inferior" browsers...
You can re-read all my posts!
Ow, but it is a Microsoft against the others assumption. And I hate statistics for the simple point that they are relative. You have only given one source of information, and that is not how you ty ad give a good representation.-=ET=- wrote:I always talked of IE, Mozilla, Firefox and sometimes Netscape (at the minimum for the compatibility).
So it's not a pb of free/not free, IE/against others, Windows/against others, etc.
Absolutely, but you soud more like a politician, or Bill Gates for that matter, feeling the minority should not be heard but instead they should be left out. That would be a bad business decision.-=ET=- wrote:I also never ask Paul to add this feature. I always said that I like this feature and it would be great IMO if phpBB add it. That's all.
I hope it's possible to say that and give our own opinion.
I never said they should need 100% compatibility before implementing a new feature.-=ET=- wrote: The only time I talked about other BB was just to answer cwbullet to ask him if phpBB should never add anything because of 1, 2, or 3% of exotic browsers; because if phpBB must wait for the 100% compatibility, it will wait a very long time for many features and phpBB will never lead anything in the future as it does now.
All I wanted to point out was that your stance was a bit discriminating.
Re: WYSIWYG message board?
I would like to repeat just once more that unless I am missing something with regard to the status of the current ECMAScript standard, the expanded client side scripting of the textarea object is non-standard. Navigator and it's children have had a non-standard DOM for a long time, as has IE. Judging from appearances, Opera 7 is the browser closest to the ECMAScript standard at the moment. Not that it makes a lot of difference in the real world, but if an argument is going to be based on benefits of standards-compliance, and if I'm reading the ECMAScript document right, then it is clear that Web developers should avoid using the extended textarea object model initiated by Microsoft and now mixed into their eclectic DOM by Navigator/Mozilla. At least not until the standard actually includes this extended textarea object model.
Just a thought. Now this vocal group is finished .
Just a thought. Now this vocal group is finished .
"I hate trolls!" - Willow Ufgood
Re: WYSIWYG message board?
i can agree with that at no pain at all.psoTFX wrote:As for this forum ... It exists for discussion of new features. It does not exist for users to have a go at each other in any shape or form because they want something and others indicate they don't. Equally it does not exist to try and "bully" us into implementing requests If that occurs topics will be locked. Not everyone will agree with ideas discussed here. We are not bound to introduce any and all requests. If these two things are kept in mind we'll all get along swimmingly.
but: i WANT to bully you no matter if you like that or not
/me thinks an rte is an important feature in future
Re: WYSIWYG message board?
And I've clearly said, now three times ... it will make absolutely no difference what you say. And should anyone post because they believe they can "bully" us ... they won't be posting here for very long
Re: WYSIWYG message board?
I think I have been misunderstood. I did not intend to torch IE so much as refer to many inferior browsers out there that do not confirm to the standards. Opera and Safari being couple that sometimes have difficulty with WYSIWYG systems.
I have for months sought to buy a WYSIWYG content management system for a customer. He wanted on that worked on 98% of his users - 16% of which are Mac users. I found one that would work on firefox / Firebird, but failed on Opera (3% of his users). It is the same old story. You can't please everyone, but a good 95% would be nice.
I am all for a WYSIWYG. If you read my prior posts, I just want it done right and I too have all the faith in world in phpbb.
I have for months sought to buy a WYSIWYG content management system for a customer. He wanted on that worked on 98% of his users - 16% of which are Mac users. I found one that would work on firefox / Firebird, but failed on Opera (3% of his users). It is the same old story. You can't please everyone, but a good 95% would be nice.
I am all for a WYSIWYG. If you read my prior posts, I just want it done right and I too have all the faith in world in phpbb.
Re: WYSIWYG message board?
... sigh ...cwbullet wrote:I think I have been misunderstood. I did not intend to torch IE so much as refer to many inferior browsers out there that do not confirm to the standards. Opera and Safari being couple that sometimes have difficulty with WYSIWYG systems...
"I hate trolls!" - Willow Ufgood