Comments on: Evaluation of WYSIWYG-editors http://www.standards-schmandards.com/2006/wysiwyg-editor-test/ A pragmatic approach to web standards and accessibility Sun, 06 Jul 2008 08:38:13 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Ryan http://www.standards-schmandards.com/2006/wysiwyg-editor-test/#comment-39588 Ryan Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:42:30 +0000 http://localhost:8888/?p=32#comment-39588 This is kind of an old thread, but for those of you coming in looking for info on WYSIWYG editors and if you happen to use Dreamweaver, there's an extension available that integrates FCKeditor into your forms through a Dreamweaver extension. It's pretty much click and go, so there aren't the usual configuration requirements. It's called <a href="http://www.justdreamweaver.com/webassist-irite-wysiwyg.html" rel="nofollow">iRite by WebAssist</a>. This is kind of an old thread, but for those of you coming in looking for info on WYSIWYG editors and if you happen to use Dreamweaver, there’s an extension available that integrates FCKeditor into your forms through a Dreamweaver extension. It’s pretty much click and go, so there aren’t the usual configuration requirements. It’s called iRite by WebAssist.

]]> By: Bill http://www.standards-schmandards.com/2006/wysiwyg-editor-test/#comment-32403 Bill Sun, 20 Jan 2008 03:51:11 +0000 http://localhost:8888/?p=32#comment-32403 This website is Great! I will recommend you to all my friends. I found so much useful things here. Thank you. This website is Great! I will recommend you to all my friends. I found so much useful things here. Thank you.

]]> By: Ingo http://www.standards-schmandards.com/2006/wysiwyg-editor-test/#comment-28219 Ingo Thu, 06 Dec 2007 05:59:41 +0000 http://localhost:8888/?p=32#comment-28219 Chris, Spaw adds blank lines to the HTML source every time I switch between HTML and Design view. Also, hitting enter (in Firefox) creates a <br> instead of a <p> Chris,
Spaw adds blank lines to the HTML source every time I switch between HTML and Design view.
Also, hitting enter (in Firefox) creates a <br> instead of a <p>

]]> By: Ingo http://www.standards-schmandards.com/2006/wysiwyg-editor-test/#comment-28218 Ingo Thu, 06 Dec 2007 05:58:43 +0000 http://localhost:8888/?p=32#comment-28218 Chris, Spaw adds blank lines to the HTML source every time I switch between HTML and Design view. Also, hitting enter (in Firefox) creates a instead of a Chris,
Spaw adds blank lines to the HTML source every time I switch between HTML and Design view.
Also, hitting enter (in Firefox) creates a instead of a

]]> By: Ingo http://www.standards-schmandards.com/2006/wysiwyg-editor-test/#comment-28216 Ingo Thu, 06 Dec 2007 05:36:33 +0000 http://localhost:8888/?p=32#comment-28216 All of the javascript editors I have tried have serious problems. TinyMCE changes URLs. FCKEditor strips out custom (server side) tags. Many editors create a blob of unformatted HTML. Unbelievable! None that I have seen have a "Format HTML" button. I mean, come on, how hard is it to indent a well formed document? It is unbelievable how many of the editors strip out valid elements such as HTML comments. I have found these problems in expensive commercial editors as well as open source editors. I do respect the authors of these tools, but I suspect that a many of these problems are caused by using browser supplied HTML edit controls. I would like to see an editor that uses the HTML source code as a reference, and injects HTML only as requested in WYSIWIG mode. Minimize rewriting of the source code. Do not delete or alter existing HTML elements. And, obviously, generate valid HTML. All of the javascript editors I have tried have serious problems.
TinyMCE changes URLs.
FCKEditor strips out custom (server side) tags.
Many editors create a blob of unformatted HTML. Unbelievable! None that I have seen have a “Format HTML” button. I mean, come on, how hard is it to indent a well formed document?
It is unbelievable how many of the editors strip out valid elements such as HTML comments.
I have found these problems in expensive commercial editors as well as open source editors.
I do respect the authors of these tools, but I suspect that a many of these problems are caused by using browser supplied HTML edit controls.
I would like to see an editor that uses the HTML source code as a reference, and injects HTML only as requested in WYSIWIG mode. Minimize rewriting of the source code. Do not delete or alter existing HTML elements. And, obviously, generate valid HTML.

]]> By: Chris http://www.standards-schmandards.com/2006/wysiwyg-editor-test/#comment-18612 Chris Sat, 08 Sep 2007 20:39:39 +0000 http://localhost:8888/?p=32#comment-18612 You must add SPAW editor. This is not a complete evaluation without it. I've used spaw for a long time, and it just got better and better. You must add SPAW editor. This is not a complete evaluation without it. I’ve used spaw for a long time, and it just got better and better.

]]> By: Carlos http://www.standards-schmandards.com/2006/wysiwyg-editor-test/#comment-2781 Carlos Tue, 13 Mar 2007 12:04:14 +0000 http://localhost:8888/?p=32#comment-2781 What's happen width KTML4 FROM www.interaktonline.com ? I think it's one of the best wysiwyg editors... What’s happen width KTML4 FROM http://www.interaktonline.com ? I think it’s one of the best wysiwyg editors…

]]> By: Den http://www.standards-schmandards.com/2006/wysiwyg-editor-test/#comment-2532 Den Tue, 06 Mar 2007 16:08:12 +0000 http://localhost:8888/?p=32#comment-2532 Well, the best WYSIWYG Website editor is the Visual Web Pack of Netbeans 5.5. It is more powerfull than Dreamweaver and it is free. Currently you still need to program with Java, but Ruby is coming soon... Well, the best WYSIWYG Website editor is the Visual Web Pack of Netbeans 5.5. It is more powerfull than Dreamweaver and it is free. Currently you still need to program with Java, but Ruby is coming soon…

]]> By: gregory http://www.standards-schmandards.com/2006/wysiwyg-editor-test/#comment-1943 gregory Tue, 13 Feb 2007 03:07:37 +0000 http://localhost:8888/?p=32#comment-1943 i think Ektron's ewebedit pro should be scored much lower. It is an active X control which you MUST install to use and is frequently out of date with firefox and incompatible with safari. The performance of thing is also pretty bad. Because it is active-x there is time spent initializing the plugin into the page, then they have a loading bar because there are half a dozen different external xml files which load up (with a cheesy preloading animation). At least FCK editor doesnt require client side installation. i think Ektron’s ewebedit pro should be scored much lower. It is an active X control which you MUST install to use and is frequently out of date with firefox and incompatible with safari.

The performance of thing is also pretty bad. Because it is active-x there is time spent initializing the plugin into the page, then they have a loading bar because there are half a dozen different external xml files which load up (with a cheesy preloading animation).

At least FCK editor doesnt require client side installation.

]]> By: Simon Rönnqvist http://www.standards-schmandards.com/2006/wysiwyg-editor-test/#comment-1667 Simon Rönnqvist Fri, 02 Feb 2007 17:23:57 +0000 http://localhost:8888/?p=32#comment-1667 BitFlux Editor is the only WYSIWYG that I know that actually validates the code and therefore can guarantee that it's valid. Mozile will include this functionality in a while. Unfortunately both are Mozila/Firefox only editors, but an upcoming version of Mozile will support IE6 too. BitFlux Editor is the only WYSIWYG that I know that actually validates the code and therefore can guarantee that it’s valid. Mozile will include this functionality in a while. Unfortunately both are Mozila/Firefox only editors, but an upcoming version of Mozile will support IE6 too.

]]>