Skip to content

New forum text editor - When to migrate?

JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 22,758
in Site Resources
Vanilla’s Advanced Editor for text formatting is soon to be a legacy product, and is being replaced with a new Rich Editor. We understand text formatting is very important for our forum users and would love to hear your feedback.

At this time, the new editor won’t allow users to edit the source of their posts and advanced users (who like to add their html via copy/paste, or like doing code stuff) may find frustrations as the new editor does everything for you, and you may not be able to copy/paste html code as easily.

Read about the new text editor here and here.

This change will happen, the question is when. We want your feedback on that. This poll will stay active for 2 weeks, and then we’ll make a decision based on poll results and community feedback.
  1. New forum text editor - When to migrate?28 votes
    1. We should migrate once the Rich Editor is out of beta.
      67.86%
    2. We should migrate when the problems caused by the legacy editor become overwhelming.
      32.14%
«1

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • Rik_KirtaniyaRik_Kirtaniya Member Posts: 1,742
    Can't we have both, and an option to switch between them as necessary? Just like Wikis on Fandom (like the BG and IWD wikis) have the option to use both the Visual Editor (easier to use) and the Classic Editor (allows more advanced stuff).

    In the document via the first link in the original post, it shows:

    What do I do with my existing Advanced Editor posts?
    Rich Editor can function side by side with Advanced Editor. Leave Advanced Editor enabled in addition to Rich Editor, and older posts will still be editable using Advanced Editor.


    Does this mean we can have both, or does it mean something else? I'd like to have both, as I think most people would also like to have. I like the idea of more emojis, but not being able to use HTML is a severe atrocity. That's why both options should be provided, and it would be better if Vanilla provides cross-compatibility between the two text-editors, or at least add HTML support for the new Rich Editor.

    That being said, if a change is inevitable, it's best to have it soon.
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 22,758
    edited September 2018
    Shandyr said:


    That means no more html coding at all, right?
    Because when I use html I don't literally get what I see, instead I do have to use "preview" in order to see what my post will look like.

    So all "coding" with html will be gone?

    It'll be done "on the fly", right there - the box you type your message in. You'll be able to choose formatting and see it immediately.
    Rik_Kirtaniya said:

    Can't we have both, and an option to switch between them as necessary?

    We can't have both. If Advanced Editor is left enabled, it'll work only for older posts.
  • Rik_KirtaniyaRik_Kirtaniya Member Posts: 1,742
    edited September 2018
    JuliusBorisov said:

    Rik_Kirtaniya said:

    Can't we have both, and an option to switch between them as necessary?

    We can't have both. If Advanced Editor is left enabled, it'll work only for older posts.
    I see... That's kind of sad.

    What about the Activity page comments? Now that we'll be having an improved text editor, does the Activity page get a revamp? Since HTML never worked there, does it mean this new editor can assist us in formatting and adding emojis, links and images in the Activity page comments?
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 22,758
    Possibly? The details are a bit hard to get.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • SkatanSkatan Member, Moderator Posts: 5,352
    Adding a third option: Whenever you want to.

    I'm here for the words mostly, everything else is just frills. Nice frills at times, I admit, but at the end of the day it doesn't matter at all to me. Maybe this is closest to option 1 though?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited September 2018
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • mlnevesemlnevese Member, Moderator Posts: 10,214
    I'm favorable to anything that makes it simple for the poster to format their posts. Many people want to post more complex messages without having to learn HTML. Actually I had to learn some HTML for my most complex posts in this forum and I use it nowhere else.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • StefanOStefanO Member Posts: 346
    edited September 2018
    https://blog.vanillaforums.com/hs-fs/hubfs/rich-editor.png?t=1536793094953&width=1200&name=rich-editor.png

    The new editor supports both BBCode and Markdown (Yes!), so everyone, even HTML hardcore fans, should be happy.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • Rik_KirtaniyaRik_Kirtaniya Member Posts: 1,742
    Okay, I vote for the new editor! I hope there are emojis on Martians, ferrets, squirrels, hamsters... and, and... maybe @Minion?
  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 3,495
    I commonly prepare comments in advance (for mod announcements, etc.). Morover, I sometimes use existing comments as templates for new posts. So the ability to use source formatting would be one of the most crucial features to me. A "Rich Editor" without the ability to enter or receive formatting on source level would just be a lot more work for me.

    If it's possible I would propose to add a toggle that allows you to choose between Rich Edit or one of the available source format modes mentioned in the linked document (Markdown, BBCode or HTML).
  • bob_vengbob_veng Member Posts: 2,308
    even if it's going to be a legacy product, i don't see why it can't still be used for quite a while, because i don't see which serous problems could crop up
  • ALIENALIEN Member Posts: 1,271
    argent77 said:

    I commonly prepare comments in advance (for mod announcements, etc.). Morover, I sometimes use existing comments as templates for new posts. So the ability to use source formatting would be one of the most crucial features to me. A "Rich Editor" without the ability to enter or receive formatting on source level would just be a lot more work for me.

    If it's possible I would propose to add a toggle that allows you to choose between Rich Edit or one of the available source format modes mentioned in the linked document (Markdown, BBCode or HTML).

    Fully agree especially on Markdown!
  • scriverscriver Member Posts: 2,072
    I agree with @Shandyr and @Argent77 about coding and stuff.

    But if the tool is going to be changed anyway I suggest the bandaid methodology. Just get it over with.
  • TarotRedhandTarotRedhand Member Posts: 1,481
    If I'm understanding what @JuliusBorisov says at the start of this thread correctly goodbye correctly formatted posts and hello typo city. I say that because they said (if I am reading this right) no editing once posted. In that case I'm screwed. I'm forever hitting "Post Comment" and immediately afterwards seeing typos that I then need to edit. Not looking forwards to this.

    TR
  • Rik_KirtaniyaRik_Kirtaniya Member Posts: 1,742
    @TarotRedhand I guess this is where the confusion lies?
    JuliusBorisov said:

    At this time, the new editor won’t allow users to edit the source of their posts...

    What @JuliusBorisov means is that you just cannot edit the source code of your post. Like you can't write <i class="Italic">Example</i> and have it show up as Example. It will still show as <i class="Italic">Example</i>.

    I don't think any forum text editor would be so improperly made as not to allow anybody to edit their posts at all. So don't worry, you will still be able to edit your posts. ;)
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited September 2018
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 22,758
    I don't believe the suggestion by @StefanO is true. Is that photo from a new article (posted later than the poll)?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited September 2018
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • bob_vengbob_veng Member Posts: 2,308
    an editor can be wysiwyg and support makdown and bbcode (every wysiwyg forum editor supports bbcode) at the same time
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited September 2018
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • StefanOStefanO Member Posts: 346
    JuliusBorisov said:


    Read about the new text editor here and here.

    Please, Julius, what exactly will we get?
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 22,758
    The way I see it, everything will happen "live" in the comment box. You'll choose formatting (by clicking buttons), and it'll do it right there. When you want to edit the comment, it'll again show you the text you wrote, but without code of your post.

    See https://forum.bubble.is/t/vanilla-rich-text-editor-beta-5-update-themes/19099/2 for example (mind that those are old images).



    from https://forum.bubble.is/t/vanilla-rich-text-editor-beta-5-update-themes/19099/28
  • bob_vengbob_veng Member Posts: 2,308
    from my experience on forums with newer software, if you type [img]url[/img], that would be detected and automatically replaced with a picture in the editor box.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 22,758
    A good question! Most likely, you'll have to delete that part and type again.
  • TorgrimmerTorgrimmer Member Posts: 331
    Rik_Kirtaniya said:

    Can't we have both, and an option to switch between them as necessary? Just like Wikis on Fandom (like the BG and IWD wikis) have the option to use both the Visual Editor (easier to use) and the Classic Editor (allows more advanced stuff).

    In the document via the first link in the original post, it shows:

    What do I do with my existing Advanced Editor posts?
    Rich Editor can function side by side with Advanced Editor. Leave Advanced Editor enabled in addition to Rich Editor, and older posts will still be editable using Advanced Editor.


    Does this mean we can have both, or does it mean something else? I'd like to have both, as I think most people would also like to have. I like the idea of more emojis, but not being able to use HTML is a severe atrocity. That's why both options should be provided, and it would be better if Vanilla provides cross-compatibility between the two text-editors, or at least add HTML support for the new Rich Editor.

    That being said, if a change is inevitable, it's best to have it soon.
    I agree, I like both, having both options is best key, to make everyone happy, including me.
This discussion has been closed.

2024 Overhaul Games, a division of Beamdog. © 2024 Hasbro, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Baldur's Gate, Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Forgotten Realms, Baldur's Gate, Wizards of the Coast and their logos are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast LLC in the U.S.A. and other countries, and are used with permission. Hasbro and its logo are trademarks of Hasbro, Inc. and are used with permission. © 1998 BioWare Corp. All Rights Reserved. BioWare, the BioWare Infinity Engine and the BioWare logo are trademarks of Bioware Corp. Black Isle Studios and the Black Isle Studios logo are trademarks of Interplay Entertainment Corp. Atari and the Atari logo are trademarks owned by Atari Interactive, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.