Oh man! You guys are using contenteditable. I had a really hard time trying to normalize how contenteditable works across browsers, so I can totally appreciate the work you’ve put in. Kudos!
Thank you. Keeping a wysiwyg working needs constant attention and care as browser inconsistencies tend to change with every new version. All pull requests, issues and tests pointing to issues are most welcome at https://github.com/Voog/wysihtml as it is an open source project and we will keep it this way.
Awesome. We are dealing with a lot of the same issues laying an editing experience overtop of any website with our Apostrophe CMS (http://demo.apostrophenow.com/). We chose CKEditor to do our text editing dirty work, but this is great as well!
If contenteditable would work as expected, no javascript based wysiwyg editors would be needed. So all wysiwyg-s can be described as “patches and hacks on a buggy feature”. Considering the growing amount of wysiwygs used it is quite surprising that almost no improvements are made to contenteditable in last years. Most improvements in wysiwygs actually come from the ability to make simpler patches thanks to some additional DOM traversing and manipulation functions.
Stelian Firez
11y agoOh man! You guys are using contenteditable. I had a really hard time trying to normalize how contenteditable works across browsers, so I can totally appreciate the work you’ve put in. Kudos!
Oliver Pulges
11y agoThank you. Keeping a wysiwyg working needs constant attention and care as browser inconsistencies tend to change with every new version. All pull requests, issues and tests pointing to issues are most welcome at https://github.com/Voog/wysihtml as it is an open source project and we will keep it this way.
Paul
11y agoLooks very nice. Thanks for sharing. Just “lightest” ist relative: Looks like it’s 200k+.
Oliver Pulges
11y agoYou are right. Though, trying to keep it as light as possible without sacrifice in functionality like handling nested tables with merged cells etc.
Paul
11y agoSo it’s x-mas and on my which list is a configurator for those things – or just a stripped version with less functions … ;-)
Kyle Stetz
11y agoAwesome. We are dealing with a lot of the same issues laying an editing experience overtop of any website with our Apostrophe CMS (http://demo.apostrophenow.com/). We chose CKEditor to do our text editing dirty work, but this is great as well!
Reminds me of a great article on the challenge of using contenteditable: https://medium.com/medium-eng/why-contenteditable-is-terrible-122d8a40e480
Oliver Pulges
11y agoIf contenteditable would work as expected, no javascript based wysiwyg editors would be needed. So all wysiwyg-s can be described as “patches and hacks on a buggy feature”. Considering the growing amount of wysiwygs used it is quite surprising that almost no improvements are made to contenteditable in last years. Most improvements in wysiwygs actually come from the ability to make simpler patches thanks to some additional DOM traversing and manipulation functions.
Stelian Firez
11y agoThis is very true. It’s a shame contenteditable was left behind.