Built in editor suggestions..

[TestMonkey]

Possibly allow normal bbcode type editor the same as when you're in the forums posting, that I would prefer instead of the spliced in editors from other code bases.

Re-creating the wheel when what you're after is mostly available already, if instead we can add to what exists the thing's that are missing thru modules in smf directly.

I do see it being helpfull to those that are used to using those type of editors agreed.
But for me, I will be using raw html/php or bbcode mostly and would rather see more happen in regards to what is already there by default instead of finding other things thrown ontop that i'll turn off more then likely.

[Crip]

Thats for SMF to decide...

[IchBin]

Hes talking about the editors we use in TP Crip. I think it does boil down to the fact of not wanting to reinvent the wheel, when there is already editors that will do everything that everyone wants. Unfortunately, I've seen far more requests for these editors than just a simple BBC editor.

[TestMonkey]

What about splitting the editors off into a SMF module that get's added into the forum itself, work on them seperatelty from TP possibly?

Would provide them to those that need them, and those of us that don't want them wont be strapped with them..

*Shrugs* No big deal as long as I can turn them off =p

Tho having bbcode function buttons more akin to what's in the forums would be handy to have.

[Crip]

I see Ich,
alrighty then, thats for Bloc to decide..Hehe..

[TestMonkey]

Yah just trying to give idea's, I can see it's a big task emplenting it all which has landed alot of bugs and small issues in the editors right into TP, and at the same time working on the php code backends.. is alot to do I know it's far from done..

I like what is being done specially with the arcticles/catagorie's can't wait to see the end product, just hoping to provide idea's that get taken into account.

As an end user It does matter to me if my pages are xhtml compliant which the editors are completely breaking currently because of their own code when you add table/templates and such..

Main Suggestions Idea's here:
1) Shifting the editors to a more proper module for SMF or TP(either), that are done more completely and correctly apart from TP to me would be correct way of doing it instead of hardcoding them directly into TP and adding more things to fix IN TP.
Notice very few TP sites are valid XHTML currently this is because of the editors not a theme or bloc's coding from what I can tell, but rather compliance issues in the editors themselves...

2) Having the forums bbcode buttons/functions from the forum could be handy to save time with some things as an added editor type feature for arcticles.

[bloc]

This is true..currently neither produce good xhtml code. For that reason they not be sued. But I can't see the trouble here..to turn them off its as easy as setting them off. And those that want to use them still, have that option.

As for work implementing them..thats not a big part of TP, in fact its "done" more or less.

BBC editor is def. planned. But its actually a little more work than you would expect, as it reckons only SMF itself will be using it (its geared against posts or PM etc.).

[TestMonkey]

This is true..currently neither produce good xhtml code. For that reason they not be sued. But I can't see the trouble here..to turn them off its as easy as setting them off. And those that want to use them still, have that option.

I can understand that to a degree, but to assume it's good enuff and not plan to go back and try to more fully fix atleast some of the problems with the editors is not a good thing to me since it's hardcoded into every TP install out there.
Considering nearly every smf/tp theme will "Valid xhtml" links at the bottom of every single page.
I don't understand why wouldn't atleast some effort be put into trying to find and resolve some of the more common bug's in the editors.
That just doesn't make any good sense to me.

I understand wanting to get past certain tasks and move onto getting other things of importance done.

I'm just hoping someone at some point will try to address this cause many user's will assume and trust blindly in the code the editors produce it reflects on the whole community SMF and TP alike.

As for the bbc code additions being planned to be added that is deffinately cool, thx for the heads up =)

[bloc]

Its a problem alrught, I have found myself turning them off in many cases because of it. But until we find a good XHTML editor replacement, the ones we use stays.

I have looked at many and there are a couple or more, that might be better suitable. But any help on finding new ones is much appreciated.

[TestMonkey]

Quick google link brings up many, I don't use them so i've no idea which ones to suggest:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=xhtml+editor+wysiwyg+%2B+php+api
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=xhtml+editor+wysiwyg

http://www.wysiwygpro.com/ features:

Your choice of XHTML 1.0 Transitional or HTML 4.01 Transitional
If you are using WysiwygPro in a web content management system or other application where the quality of HTML output is highly important you can configure the editor to generate either HTML 4.01 or well formed XHTML 1.0. In XHTML mode WysiwygPro will convert your documents to XHTML even if they weren't originally.

Only problem is finding one's that are free, the one I listed is a paid liscence

Their are a few including the above that say they produce compliant XHTML code.

I'd be willing to test a few new editors out on a test server to see what their output is..
Just need to know the particular's im guessing you would prefer the editor have a well developed api to plug into the code and such, and that it be free.. anything else?

On a side note the FCKeditor that you are working with is not bad just has a few flaws (mostly with premade templates) that may be fixed in later releases from what im reading in the roadmap from the author.
For most peoples need's it seems the better of the two you're working with at the moment.

Also it seems FCKEditor and http://tinymce.moxiecode.com/ are the two editors of choice for this sort of thing.