Sorry ignore, sent to wrong list :)
Bob Schellink wrote:
I still think Nicedit would make for a better example than YUI. It loads
quite a bit faster because its packaged in two resources (one js, one
css), while YUI is packaged in 13 resources.
regards
bob
Malcolm Edgar wrote:
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 6:00 PM, Adrian A.<[email protected]>
wrote:
What is the issue with the YUIRichText editor? Size or dependencies?
I am not sure if size should be a constraining factor for a RichText
editor, as the resources should be compressed when served, and then
cached on the users PC. With RichText editors they are not controls
you would put on your home page.
Size, dependencies, complexity.
Even if it's a quite well documented library, users find it quite
complex.
For the WYSIWYG, I see that people still prefer TinyMCE.
Unfortunately TinyMCE has an incompatible LGPL license
For JS libraries in general, after the first WTF (because of the unusual
approach), most users I've worked with find jQuery the most
productive (but
it has also the biggest number of books too :) ).
but the potential issue we have
with JS libraries is that the runtime environments (browsers) are not
stable, and can necessitate constant maintenance of the libraries.
I'm aware of this problem, but since JS is the only "spice" for the web
right now,
IMHO there's not much we can do. Minimizing the use of JS in Click
would not
be a very smart option since the direction of all frameworks (and user's
request too) is for more JS: and even the browser support goes in this
direction - see the JS threads, and JS engine performance increases
of the
newer browsers.
I am not saying don't include JS, just we need to take care selecting
libraries which are actively supported as web browsers are constantly
changing: IE6, IE7, IE8, FF, Safari, Chrome, etc.
Adrian.
regards Malcolm Edgar
