Standard Editor (Again)

[PeterUK]

It seems that despite this post:


Matt has clarified in his recent blog post (check the comments) that we will not be getting an editor which has working buttons when RTE mode is disabled, it will remain the same way it is now (press the toggle in the top left of the editor, and while you can edit the raw BBCode here, all of the buttons which make BBCode easy to use will be disabled).

I thought the previous feedback topic was locked because it was resolved that we would get an editor which works that way, but it appears not, so presumably another feedback topic is now appropriate?

There are many people who still use the standard editor all the time, or even if only for a few minutes to fix a post or edit a difficult-to-manage-in-the-RTE one, and not having the BBCode buttons is a pain.

[TSP]

It's very sad indeed. And a broken promise. Matt promised quite clearly it would be in a next version.

Most of our experienced users are still to this day complaining about the RTE-editor, the lack of buttons available in the STD and bugs in STD and STD/RTE-switching.

I feel that we're losing many guides and large posts due to this, the problem arise when the RTE-editor messes up complicated posts in the wysiwyg-preview or when switching modes and included images are shown and people have to scroll through their long faq posts etc.

A bug free STD-editor that includes buttons will always be superior to the RTE in my opinion, and that's the way our users prefer it as well.

The RTE may be superior in short posts (where bbcode is rarely used anyway..) but in long and bbcode-full posts it's not.

And the STD puts in so much unessary bbcode in the posts sometimes. *sigh*

[Saiga]

I was pretty disappointed when I saw the standard editor wouldn't be getting buttons. Had no idea about the previous promise, but still disappointed nonetheless. Though after typing out bbcode for all this time because of how bad the RTE was, I'd probably still type it out if there were buttons on the standard.

[Perhonorificus_merged]

I too have received complaints from my users about the "dumbed down" STD editor that is being forced on those of us who don't like RTE and how invasive it is when trying to write a long post with many characteristics, and judging from the blog post, nothing will be done about this despite the countless negative comments I have read here about it.

Seriously disappointed about Matt breaking his promise.

[Wolfie]

It seems that despite this post:

http://community.inv...20#entry2193192

Matt has clarified in his

recent blog post

(check the comments) that we will not be getting an editor which has working buttons when RTE mode is disabled, it will remain the same way it is now (press the toggle in the top left of the editor, and while you can edit the raw BBCode here, all of the buttons which make BBCode easy to use will be disabled).

While Matt did say it would be in the next version, something could have come up which made it more of a hassle than a benefit to try to come through with it. I've been using IPB for about 8 years now and generally Matt is able to pull of some amazing accomplishments. So for him to not do it tells me that there was a reason for it. Could be that he encountered problems with it and instead of stopping development for that one thing, he's put it on the side to work on. Also could be that he forgot (he is human after all). Perhaps when a list of "to do" things was put together, it was snipped off because other things took priority. This is why IPS doesn't like to 'promise' features to clients, because if something happens and they're unable to include it, people get mad without knowing the reasons.

I was pretty disappointed when I saw the standard editor wouldn't be getting buttons. Had no idea about the previous promise, but still disappointed nonetheless. Though after typing out bbcode for all this time because of how bad the RTE was, I'd probably still type it out if there were buttons on the standard.

I'm used to typing out the bbCode anyways. So I only tend to notice the buttons being gone when I'm trying to use something like the font color or font type. Other than that, using the quote, url, img, etc tags seems like more work and time to go clicking a button than it is to just type it out.

[Rimi]

+1 support.

[PSNation]

I also support this

[Makoto]

Throwing in my support.

[XTF]

This is why IPS doesn't like to 'promise' features to clients, because if something happens and they're unable to include it, people get mad without knowing the reasons.

That's why issue trackers exist. They let others know what the status of bug report and feature requests is. Having to guess sucks, as is shown by this topic.

[Wolfie]

That's why issue trackers exist. They let others know what the status of bug report and feature requests is. Having to guess sucks, as is shown by this topic.

The bug tracker is used for bugs, not feature requests. IPS has also said, on numerous occasions, that they don't like to provide a public "road map" of planned features because if they don't come through on something, then people get upset that it wasn't done. They announce what has been completed or is nearly complete, so as to avoid telling us something to look forward to and then it doesn't happen.

[13.]

Once I gladly have chosen IPB. Now I begin to doubt the choice.

Too many faeces implemented. Too many simple and useful features are dead or not implemented for a long time. So sad.

[Hexsplosions]

I'm gonna go against the grain here, but the new editor is extremely reliable and user friendly. Granted it had it's weaknesses when it was first included (the formatting was screwy) and I objected to the old editor being all but disabled, but it's had a chance to mature now and makes using the forum software an absolute doddle... Especially for beginners. I run two forums using IPB and not one user on either forum has complained (total 1K users, which yes, I know, is small... but not one complaint).

Do you really need the old editor?

[PeterUK]

I'm gonna go against the grain here, but the new editor is extremely reliable and user friendly. Granted it had it's weaknesses when it was first included (the formatting was screwy) and I objected to the old editor being all but disabled, but it's had a chance to mature now and makes using the forum software an absolute doddle... Especially for beginners. I run two forums using IPB and not one user on either forum has complained (total 1K users, which yes, I know, is small... but not one complaint).

Do you really need the old editor?

It's not about having the old editor itself, it's about having the buttons available when you toggle off the RTE in the current editor. Quite often, using the RTE can be unwieldy, when working with large images, or when having to fix a post which has been messed up by the RTE (which happens occasionally), and when doing this, the BBCode buttons aren't available at all, which is annoyance. So much of an annoyance that it caused a 7 page feedback topic originally where a fix was promised. Many people also simply prefer not to use the RTE, note that I don't claim it's anywhere near a majority.

[Ryan H.]

The way I see it, if you can't stand RTE, you're probably the kind who would learn to type the BBCodes and not use the buttons anyway. :ermm:

I, for one, find the editor to be quite easy and generally stable for use as it is. As far as I'm aware, the same holds true for most or all of our userbase as well.

[Makoto]

I, for one, find the editor to be quite easy and generally stable for use as it is.

There are several acknowledged problems with the current RTE, I don't think it's fair to call it stable yet. If you want to actually use any of the RTE features, that is.

I think that might be forcing a bit of bias on a lot of people, that they're fed up with all the bugs and drawbacks of the RTE and they just want it gone for good.

But it's been stated hat most all of these glitches should be fixed in 3.4.0. I hope so. Becauseying when stuff like this happens.it's ann

[Rimi]

I'm gonna go against the grain here, but the new editor is extremely reliable and user friendly. Granted it had it's weaknesses when it was first included (the formatting was screwy) and I objected to the old editor being all but disabled, but it's had a chance to mature now and makes using the forum software an absolute doddle... Especially for beginners. I run two forums using IPB and not one user on either forum has complained (total 1K users, which yes, I know, is small... but not one complaint).

Do you really need the old editor?

Yes I really need it. Standard editors give you fine grain controls of how much of your text is being surrounded by bbcode. It is too frustrating to do it in a wysiwyg. Centering text via highlight and clicking a button is far more accurate in the 3.1.4 standard editor than in today's ckeditor. Maniuplating spacing of items is much easier and as has been said countless times a WYSIWYG editor simply does not work well for long, formatted posts. Many communities like to do contests and events. The first threeish posts of these threads are huge and have lots of formatting. All this formatting is easier to do in a standard editor because specific formats are far far far easier to replicate. Try selecting a part in your post and assign it a font a size and a color. Now do it somewhere else in your post. Anyone can see how much easier this is in bbcode mode.

So really, do we absolutely need this mode? Without doubt is this mode absolutely required in our communities? Yes yes yes a thousand times yes. I agree with you that in an overwhelming majority if cases that the ckeditor will be the preferred method of posting, but frankly speaking the standard mode provides luxuries that a WYSIWYG editor does not. And judging by Matt's comment in the blog his hope is that the WYSIWYG editor becomes a standard and he might even wish to phase out the standard editor. Not saying he would do that but if he did then that would be awful. WYSIWYG editors are not as great as they initially look. That's why ckeditor comes built in with a source mode.

[Wolfie]

Do you really need the old editor?

The problem with WYSIWYG type editors is that despite how well one is designed, there will always be situations where it's going to mess up what someone wants to do. So having the ability to edit the source directly will always be needed. There are many sites where the WYSIWYG editor lets you modify the source directly because there are going to be times when 'getting your hands dirty' will be the only way to really accomplish what you want to do. So if you want to call it the 'old' editor, when instead it's better referred to as a 'bare' or 'plain' editor, then yes, it's a need. The issue that some have is that they want some/all of the buttons to work as it does in the RTE mode. The main difference between the modes comes down to appearance. RTE shows you how it's *supposed* to look when you submit it. STD/standard/source mode shows you the actual bbcode tags in plain text. When I'm having to do a lot of formatting or other bbcodes, I tend to prefer to handle it directly myself, with the option to use RTE to get a glance at how it is likely to appear. I just find it to be easier that way.

[Matt]

Guys, in software development, you can't read a "yes, we'll do that" as a "promise". The best we can do is let you know of our intentions. These change often, though. We decide how long we want to spend on a release and then fit in as much as we can.

My focus for 3.4 for the editor was to rewrite the 'back-end' to make it much more stable and to remove all those RTE-STD switching bugs. I think most will agree that was more important than implementing BBCode buttons to which most probably wouldn't use.

[shought]

I've created a poll about this suggestion, please vote :smile:

[SocialBrands]

Guys, in software development, you can't read a "yes, we'll do that" as a "promise". The best we can do is let you know of our intentions. These change often, though. We decide how long we want to spend on a release and then fit in as much as we can.

My focus for 3.4 for the editor was to rewrite the 'back-end' to make it much more stable and to remove all those RTE-STD switching bugs. I think most will agree that was more important than implementing BBCode buttons to which most probably wouldn't use.

It's not a matter of it being a promise or not. The WYSIWYG editor for IPB is broken. It has problems. We all know it. It needs to be fixed. Period.

The standard editor isn't just a fall-back option, it's widely used.

Your "most probably wouldn't use" statement I must call nonsense on. I highly doubt it's based on any actual data. There's a toggle button because a standard editor is obviously needed. Now, do you think everyone who uses the toggle knows how to write all the BBCode the buttons provide? Most of them? You mean the same people you're trying to (or think you have) trained to only use WYSIWYG? Most of those people will know how to write BBCode?

C'mon dude, this is a screw up. Let's call it what it is. If someone were to go around advertising on admin forums the fact that IPB does not have a standard mode editor with buttons you would lose sales. Because the forum admins/owners are your customers. Not the end users. Listen to them.

[Jυra]

The link is from 2011.

We've successfully beaten IPS into submission. :o

[TracyIsland]

Because the forum admins/owners are your customers. Not the end users. Listen to them.

No they are not. The wider audience, that being the members of the community, are the customers. The forum admin/owners are just the managers.

Every design and coding decision should be based on what is going to be best for the users of the community. If a majority of the community posts are made by a forum admin/owner, then you don't have a community. You have a personal blog.