[Solved] HTML Editor upgrade

[dlpirl]

I expect this has been mentioned before, but as a new CMSMS user/website designer, my biggest need is for better HTML editing. Currently of course I copy and paste from my locally installed HTML editor, but that gets old and cumbersome after awhile -- not to mention its not portable to the client -- and I really want our clients to be able to make more sophisticated mods to their own pages that what the current CMSMS HTML editor can do.

I've found a great online solution outside CMSMS: ezHTMLarea. Begin at http://fslactivities.sd61.bc.ca/ezHTMLarea/.  Downside is it only works in IE, but it has all the table row & column insert, delete, merge and split that I am looking for.

Any chance that something like ezHTMLarea can be integrated into the core in the next major release?

--Donald

[calguy1000]

well, typically our problem is how to restrict users to using only a few styles, and a few tools in a wysiwyg editor.  this is because if we give users too much power it is too easy for them to 'break' the style of the website. 

If you think about the average secretary or personal assistant with no html knowledge updating the news on a site, you want them to be able to edit the news articles, but not mess up the styles.  so that everything looks properly.

FCKEditor, and TinyMCE are good at allowing you to restrict functionality in the wysiwyg....

and if your users are adding significant ammounts of content,  then they need to have a greater knowledge of html and css. so you could use the full versions of TinyMCE or FCKEditor which have the table stuff (afaik) for them.  But you want to restrict the use of tables to tabular data that is suited for a table, not just allow them to use tables for layout (that's a bad thing).

[dlpirl]

OK, I'll bite and expose my limited understanding of web design coolness... Why is using tables for layout a "bad thing" (it seems to be working for my needs) and what should I be doing instead? If its div tags, I somehow don't yet "get it" and would appreciate being pointed in the right direction to learn.

--Don

[calguy1000]

well, a simple google search (for a concise answer) gave me this:

http://phrogz.net/CSS/WhyTablesAreBadForLayout.html

[dlpirl]

But of course you had to already know that tables are bad to google it that way . OK, so I need to really get into CSS, my admittedly weak area.  If you are "intermediate" with css, calguy, I am a total noob. All I do is find the color I want to change and do so .  I really had no idea that css could control structure in a manner similar to tables.  Good thing I love to learn new stuff and appropriately integrate it into my skill set.

[calguy1000]

I'll clarify....

Tables are bad for layout, for controlling how things display on your page in general.  If you're displaying tabular data (a report for example).... then tables are prefectly fine.  Calendars are a good example of an appropriate use for tables too.

However......  'minor admins' should not be creating tables in output.... this stuff should be automated for them.  they shouldn't be copying and pasting from word either.

If you don't want the layout and appearance of a page to break when a user edits things, then what they can do has to be strictly limited.  Thats one of the (biggest?) reasons CMS Made simple has templates in all of the modules, and everywhere. 

CMS Made simple allows the website developer to control via templates and css, how things are displayed.  and most of the modules work with templates fluently, to allow the user to edit text  that provides fields that fills in certain areas of a template.  if a wysiwyg is provided in certain areas of a module, the users abilities in that wysiwyg should be limited so that they can't mess up the styles.

Not bad for an 'intermediate' at css eh

[dlpirl]

OK... Obviously I am learning something about exactly what is intended to be simple in cms ms and what expectations are at both the developer and client levels -- so thanks for bearing with me .

Am I correct then in expecting that in most cms ms developer/client relationships, only content, not styles are meant to be handed off to the client? What if the client (like my brother's restaurant) is considering changing their color scheme? I don't see an easy way for them to do that themselves in cms ms, so they need to go back to the developer for that?

So generally speaking in cms ms is "Content" = things like page text and calendar data, but not color schemes, etc?

[calguy1000]

Yes, end users should only be editing 'content'..... and then only in a controlled sense.

Color schemes are part of the layout.... and hence part of the CSS which is usually hidden from 'minor editors'
and, because CSS isn't controlled under the templating engine, there's no way that end users can, or should be able to edit the CSS.

So no, if the client, i.e: your brothers restaraunt wants to change the colour scheme, they'll have to get you, or another professional web develoepr to edit the stylesheets for them.

And yes, things like colours and layout (2 column with header and menu at the top and footer at the bottom) vs. (3 column with header and menu at the top with footer and menu at the bottom) etc.  are layout issues, and should not be controlled by 'minor editors'.  this is the pervue of 'web developers' and 'web designers'.

'minor editors' should be adding news articles, adding calendar entries, perhaps editing the content of a set of pages, etc. but probably not adding or deleting pages (because that could easily break the layout).  they should be entering text and dates, in a very strictly controlled manner to a restricted interface.

[dlpirl]

Thanks, calguy. That helps clarify things. I have to say I was hoping/expecting that clients would be a little more empowered.

For instance, before I found cms ms I designed and built a php driven website for a client integrating externally developed photo gallery, calendar, message board, and I gave capability for certain pages to have editable content (using a very cool MySQL based tool called php runner). The only trouble is that each of those client controlled areas has an individual userid and password (which I of course made identical for the 2-3 person client admin team).  So I looked for a CMS ms that gave me one userid/pwd for all content, but at least at this point in its development, the cms ms modules are not as good as the ones I gathered and integrated. So I guess I was expecting to compensate by being able to hand off more layout control to the client.

Don't get me wrong... I still think cms ms is great, and much better (from what I can tell) for clients than other cms, but my expectations are now a little less than they were previously.  I'd love to help develop the mods. Maybe I'll be able to contribute on some things like forums and calendars.

[calguy1000]

We would appreciate the help....

But yeah, if end users want a professional looking website, AND they want to be able to edit significant amounts of the layout and colours etc., then they have to have some knowledge of CSS and HTML....and they can be granted higher permissions.

If they don't have the knowledge, they should be given very strict permissions so that they can add and edit certain things, but have no capability to effect the layout and appearance of the site.

Ask alot of the professionals here..... they'll agree with me.  The average secretary that needs to add a calendar entry for the anual general meeting of their organization, or the next free breakfast does not know enough about CSS/HTML to maintain the site structure and the appearance of the page.... therefore their permissions should be restricted, down even to the items that are available on their wysiwyg editor.  There have been many conversations about this in the forum under one topic subject or another.

Even with a table based layout you cannot give users a hugely flexible wysiwyg editor and expect that the site will look proper after the user edits things. 

Either that, or you can expect alot more support phone calls when they mess something up.

These are not 'CMS Made Simple' limitations.  Infact, they are features.  From what I understand most content management systems are implementing permissions in this manner, just for that reason.  Professionals develop controlled sites that they can then hand off to the end-user to add and adjust minor content items, without messing up the appearance of the site. 

Infact, many content management systems are going even further (we will with 2.0 as well).... and not allow edits made by a 'minor' editor to go live until a 'more major' editor approves them.  This allows the changes to be approved for content as well as for style.

so..... I guess your clients have been exceptionally forgiving.... or you don't mind the phone calls....

[calguy1000]

An experienced web developer, particularly with smarty and CMS could get past 'some' of this
by mixing smarty, and custom content blocks in the pages (not site wide)  that would allow overriding colors, etc. 

but again.... you normally wouldn't want them to.

why would you even want to allow the customer the possibility of setting colors or adjusting layout on your website design after you've spent considerable time finding a colour scheme, developing graphics, and setting a layout that are all pleasing to the eye, do some fancy things, and meet the function of the user in a way he probably never even imagined possible?

[calguy1000]

oh yeah, and I forgot to mention about things like CSS and XHTML validation so that your page stands a better chance of appearing properly in the various browsers...... you can't let a 'minor' admin effect that.  there are probably more considerations too,

[calguy1000]

oh yeah, accessibility.... I always forget that stuff.

[dlpirl]

so..... I guess your clients have been exceptionally forgiving.... or you don't mind the phone calls....

Thanks for completing the picture, calguy. I do understand and agree with the need for appropriately granular permissions.  I now realize its important to scale back the access that my brother currently has to his cms ms site under development

As of today, I have no cms ms clients yet except my brother's restaurant that I am in the process of porting to cms ms from GoLive work a few years ago.  As soon as he agrees, it will replace teh existing site, I will post it in "cms show off" and begin to look for some other cms ms work. 

The custom cms work I did (before finding cms ms) has worked out very well, because I made sure that teh clients understood how to use the custom content modules I integrated, and there is no way for them to change layout.  The client actually has a techie who knew of Drupal and Joomla, but he was not be the person in charge of content, and I could tell those who were would not be able to handle those cms, so I chose to build a custom cms.

[dlpirl]

FYI... This http://www.htmldog.com/guides/cssadvanced/layout/ is what I needed to know about how to do css layout.

calguy, I read your sticky post doc "Some General Principles" about what cms ms designers and developers need to know to use cms ms -- mostly saying to understand smarty. IMO this info on css layout should be added. I am generally very good at googling to learn what I need to know -- but the key is need to know. I had heard that css was the way to go had looked into it but never saw anything specifically oriented towards how to do to css layout as contrasted with table based layout. 

So now the features in the css ms wysiwyg page editor make sense to me.  Thanks.