Hi Andreas, On Tue, 5 May 2009, Andreas Hartmann wrote:
> Hi Rainer, > > Rainer Schöpf schrieb: > > […] > > > Improve the TinyMCE integration by making tiny_valid_elements.js and the > > RelaxNG schema compatible (if possible). > > I guess this would affect the BXE integration, wouldn't it? It wouldn't if only tiny_valid_elements.js is changed. Or am I mistaken? > Does it make sense to consider abandoning BXE? There are at least two > organizations still using it [1]. Since it is Firefox-only, I consider > Firedocs a valid replacement, but I wouldn't like to remove BXE before the > Firedocs integration is production-ready. We should probably even do at least > one release with both editors to provide a transition phase. I agree. And even if the decision is made to remove BXE, I would prefer it to keep the BXE integration and disable it in the default setup, and remove it in a later release. > > This might break some features of TinyMCE, but would avoid the extremely > > annoying and difficult to understand error messages you sometimes get when > > you click on TinyMCE's Save button. > > > > Of course, I'm most interested in TinyMCE since I recommended it to my > > users. I can prepare a stripped down copy of tiny_valid_elements.js; I have > > already started doing it on a case by case basis. > > Do you think we can provide a production-ready TinyMCE integration in the > 2.0.3 release, let's say in maybe two weeks? I think it's possible. The changes to tiny_valid_elements.js are straightforward, but I need to test a bit, especially against my list of pitfalls ;-) Rainer --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
