Re: Improving content editing for PlanetSVG (was Re: PlanetSVG Content)

Maybe I can work on this after the feed parser issue this Thursday...

Jeff

On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Rob <rob@latenightpc.com> wrote:
> Last time I set up FCKEditor I had a few problems. I had trouble making the
> preview match up exactly with the style for the published node. I found
> FCKEditor slow to load and it required some custom Javascript to make it
> possible to turn it on and off. And there's also set up that has to be done
> for the toolbars. My biggest concern with FCKEditor though was that I had
> cases where I'd lose changes when editing HTML by hand then switching back
> to wysiwyg mode. That said, I do still think it's the best cross-browser
> wysiwyg editor and I still have the configuration I worked on previously. I
> can put it up on PlanetSVG and we can try it out.
>
> I haven't done a lot with image upload yet but I know there are a few good
> image modules out there (IMCE being one of them). I think we need something
> and will get to it but it could take me a while. If anyone else wants to
> work on this just let me know and I can set you up with Subversion access
> and help you set up a local development copy of the site.
>
> Regards,
> Rob Russell
> rob@latenightpc.com
> http://www.latenightpc.com/blog
>
> Robin Berjon wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 7, 2009, at 05:50 , Doug Schepers wrote:
>>>
>>> By the way, the Drupal authoring interface could really use some more
>>> friendliness, especially for inserting images or links, and marking up the
>>> text content.  I think it would be great if we could find an easy way to
>>> allow people to upload and link to SVG images... we could then share that
>>> back into Drupal as a module, and that could in turn help spread the use of
>>> SVG in Drupal sites.
>>
>> A lot of that is already covered if you add the Wysiwyg API and IMCE
>> modules, and FCKEditor (it's a matter of unzipping and activating them). As
>> for adding SVG support (probably into IMCE) it shouldn't be too hard but I
>> haven't looked at that too closely.
>>
>
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 7 April 2009 14:29:40 UTC