Poll: Choose your preferred editor for MyBB 1.9
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
SCEditor
11.29%
7 11.29%
TinyMCE
16.13%
10 16.13%
Redactor
30.65%
19 30.65%
QuillJS
9.68%
6 9.68%
WysiBB
0%
0 0%
DVZ MinimalEditor
1.61%
1 1.61%
Homebrew/Custom Editor
27.42%
17 27.42%
Summernote
1.61%
1 1.61%
Froala
1.61%
1 1.61%
Total 62 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Editor Discussion
#81
Being dragged down the page to reply isn't incredibly optimal either. Possibly have the quick reply appear below the post you're replying to, then drag you to your post afterwards. Which also brings into question the necessity of quoting an entire post per each reply, which I don't think is optimal either. The Flarum route may be better https://i.imgur.com/tJNqbEO.gifv
Reply
#82
For MyBB and XenForo, I usually hit multiquote, go through a few pages and compose my reply at the end.

Everything in quick reply is pretty much a no-brainer and it is so annoying in XenForo when you have to go off to some separate page just to embed an extra image after creating a post or something else. You should be able to do everything from quick edit and quick reply. Add a new attachment? Done. Bold a bit of text? Done.

If JavaScript is disabled, then maybe you could have a fall-back of sorts.

As for this poll, I personally think TinyMCE is the best choice as it is a free open source editor used by many large reputable brands, has a vast array of plugins which makes the software useful for a number of not so obvious use cases, etc.
Reply
#83
Any ideas how Flarum's note system works with JS disabled? Does it just turn into a link? I quite like being able to read posts/threads without using a mouse at all personally.
Reply
#84
Flarum is practically unusable without js, including linking to posts. Definitely an advantage Mybb has over it.
Reply
#85
(2019-06-07, 12:01 PM)Eric Wrote:
(2019-06-06, 03:57 PM)ks1001 Wrote:
(2019-06-06, 03:26 PM)labrocca Wrote:
Quote:The editor is the core part of discussion software. Please get the best and most expensive option. PLEASE.

I use Quick Reply most of the time.  I manually type all my mycode. I very rarely use the WYSIWYG editor and I always use it in Source Mode.  

I'd love to see a poll asking how often members post using the editor.

I think there should be more advanced editor in Quick Reply too. Maybe not full editor, but some more features (MyCodes)

There should only be one editor interface, quick reply, and it should be fully featured. Why you have to load an entire page to be able to get an editor is beyond me.

totally agree. this was a huge complaint on a forum I used to help out with.

on my site, while I don't have the full editor in quick reply (there used to be a plugin for this in mybb, I think, but it was buggy iirc), I have a button called 'full editor', that, when clicked, it'll save your message and take you to the full editor.

mybb should definitely look into this as a solid UX improvement.
Reply
#86
(2019-06-07, 12:01 PM)Eric Wrote:
(2019-06-06, 03:57 PM)ks1001 Wrote:
(2019-06-06, 03:26 PM)labrocca Wrote:
Quote:The editor is the core part of discussion software. Please get the best and most expensive option. PLEASE.

I use Quick Reply most of the time.  I manually type all my mycode. I very rarely use the WYSIWYG editor and I always use it in Source Mode.  

I'd love to see a poll asking how often members post using the editor.

I think there should be more advanced editor in Quick Reply too. Maybe not full editor, but some more features (MyCodes)

There should only be one editor interface, quick reply, and it should be fully featured. Why you have to load an entire page to be able to get an editor is beyond me.

Years ago on HF a few members had userscripts that added full text editors to the quick reply box. They worked quite well for those who chose to use that userscript. I personally type out all of my MyCode as well, but I understand that I am probably NOT in the majority there for the collective Internet.
Developer @ HF for labrocca
Reply
#87
Bumping this as we've still only had 50 votes on the poll which is hardly representative of the entire MyBB Community.

If I recall correctly, effone was going to experiment with Redactor at some point in the near future and evaluate how suitable it might be for integration within MyBB 1.9 - Euan is also going to invest some time into the custom editor he was working on too.
Reply
#88
(2019-06-05, 05:44 PM)labrocca Wrote:
(2019-06-05, 05:22 PM)kawaii Wrote: The 1.6 editor would need recreating from the ground up - it relied on prototype.js, which we completely removed in the upgrade to 1.8.


Ahh...so that's why it was dropped. What's your assessment on the difficulty of updating it for jQuery?

Preferably the editor of choice wouldn't have such dependencies (similarly to requiring at least PHP 7.1 to run MyBB 1.9, requirements for browsers would get bumped to take advantage of new features in place of JavaScript libraries' functions, and improve development experience along the way).

(2019-06-05, 07:13 PM)StefanT Wrote:
(2019-06-05, 04:00 PM)Euan T Wrote: if we were going to use Redactor (I've already made my thoughts on that clear), we'd need either a JS plugin for it to use MyCode or write PHP back-end code to convert HTML into MyCode and back to HTML (to allow editing old posts). IMO that's a heck of a lot of work - our existing parser is buggy enough as is without adding more complexity like this.
This applies to pretty much every WYSIWYG editor. However parsing a small subset of presumably valid HTML isn't too difficult with all those edge cases. TinyMCE does within less than 100 lines of code (needs to be modified for MyBB but that's rather simple).

Note we'll have to move away from regex-based parsing (at least for most core codes) to reduce output problems, including security issues (server-side parser vulnerabilities in the 1.8.x branch were addressed in 1.8.11, 1.8.16, 1.8.18, and also 1.8.21 - all High Risk ones).
s9e\TextFormatter logic, for example: https://s9etextformatter.readthedocs.io/...Tag_rules/

(2019-06-06, 07:41 AM)StefanT Wrote:
(2019-06-05, 07:41 PM)martec Wrote: sorry but please no...
use js to convert html to bbcode is worst choice....
It can be done either on client-side or on server-side. Both ways have their advantages. TinyMCE for example shows BBCode in source code mode instead of HTML: https://www.tiny.cloud/docs/plugins/bbcode/#liveexample
(2019-06-05, 07:55 PM)Euan T Wrote: We're already planning on using TextFormatter, we've been planning that for a while. It's what we use for the 2.0 parser too.
Last time I checked it TextFormatter was considerably slower than the existing parser.

We expect to have support for parser caching, so it shouldn't have a significant impact on cached content.
devilshakerz.com/pgp (DF3A 34D9 A627 42E5 BC6A 6750 1F2F B8AA 28FF E1BC) ▪ keybase.io/devilshakerz
Reply
#89
(2019-06-06, 07:41 AM)StefanT Wrote: Last time I checked it TextFormatter was considerably slower than the existing parser.

Hi, author here. Do you have some code that I could run here to compare the performance of either solution? Or just a snippet using s9e\TextFormatter would be fine.

In my experience, the library is at least as performant as any hand-crafted solution as long as you cache the parser/renderer instances and not generate new ones before each use. You can send me a pm if you don't want to derail the thread.
Reply
#90
I've used this code from the docs to parse posts from a MyBB database:
use s9e\TextFormatter\Bundles\Forum as TextFormatter;
$xml = TextFormatter::parse($message);
TextFormatter::render($xml);
It's about 10 times slower than the default parser.
[Image: banner.png]
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)