Thanks for the response.
OK, basically I like to stir things up and get a lively discussion - you
can have a boring one anytime, so why bother. Especially, I like to have
a lively tech talk with someone who knows their stuff - like you. So,
thanks again for coming back.
Rubyforge stuff: OK, I had a look. Lots of stuff, as you say. Trouble is
you can't really tell what's what in there, same as any forge - too
confusing if you don't know the apps. My areas are SEO/ CMS/ ecommerce,
so if you know of anything in those fields that comes from Ruby, then
maybe I've heard of it.
WYSIWYG editor faults: well, the faults I had in mind are obvious
feature holes, and things that just plain don't work. So it shouldn't be
a massive task to avoid them. I'm thinking that a plugin app that weighs
in at say a couple of megabytes or so isn't going to be a lifetime's
work. And whoever does the job right will get a good rep and maybe some
cash out of it.
TinyMCE: I'm sorry, but I'm not impressed - it doesn't do several things
other editors do, and those it does, it's merely OK at. It's one of the
first things Joomla implementers ditch, for example, because up against
TMedit or FCKeditor it's a poor choice (and neither of those are
anywhere near perfect). Maybe you can add functionality - but why isn't
there a version out there, then, that has
it? I'm not a dev, that's why I'm asking - if I could do the job, I'd do
it. We'd use TinyMCE for the lowest level of content editor, but no
higher (basic news uploads maybe).
For example: text - it doesn't do full text formatting. You can't choose
your font. You can't choose your font size (as TMedit can - often you
want to go outside the CSS, for one reason or another). Images: it
doesn't do image uploads (as FCKeditor does). Unless the image is on the
server, you can't use it - so where does that leave the frontend editor?
They can only write text, then - and the webmaster is going to have to
load the images, which kind of kills the idea of user-edited CMS. Does
it do the alt. text? - not sure if it does - but you've got to have
that. Links: it can't browse for content to link to (like TMedit). It's
got some neat JS popup effects - but I need simple, practical
functionality, and FCKeditor is way better (but lousy with text). Best
not to add yet more JS to the pages, in any case.
OK, it's good at some things, as you say, like anchors and cleaning up
Word code - but we need better font controls than this has, and better
image management. I appreciate the fact that there is a difference in
requirements for backend and frontend editors; but the perfect editor
would be able to satisfy both, with some functions disabled for frontend
[quote] "And then why are you making this challenge to a bunch of Ruby
on Rails coders?"
Fair enough - I need to explain. It happened like this: a RoR dev
pressured a pal hard to implement RadiantCMS for a big project with a
decent traffic load (the sort of thing Plone or Drupal is normally the
first choice for, if you're talking OSS). So, I looked at Radiant, and
could see that it is still a new project, and still has a way to go
before it is ready for release into the big wide world (see the review
on my site). I invested some time in that, and also in looking at RoR. I
didn't really want to knock it, as there are some good signs of
first-class quality in the Radiant project, it's just that it isn't
ready yet (the page code is really A1 and that's rare, even for mature
So I got to thinking: what have I seen that is useful to a lot of people
and built with Ruby? And I couldn't really put my finger on anything, so
I thought, what the hell, it's supposed to be good for webapps so let's
wind up the Ruby guys a bit and see if they bite (heh heh!). A good
wysiwyg editor (I am very pernickety I admit, the existing ones just
don't do it for me) would go a long way to convincing many people that
RoR has some substance.
Remember, I'm not a dev, so once we're into coding (apart from CSS,
basic PHP and stuff) you've lost me. You say JS would be a better
proposition here? OK, I'll take your word for it (as long as the JS
doesn't make it onto the web pages of course, that's the last thing you
Once again - thanks for the feedback.
p.s. This forum - can you only reply using a full quote? Hmm, needs a
Ruby dev then...