Forum:New editor

I hate the new editor, the old one was soo easy to use Quark16 16:52, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * And..? Did you check if you can change it in your preferences? 17:05, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The problem is that you can't disable it via preferences. See: Forum:New edit window. I have make it look like the old editor using JavaScript, so if you want it just ping me. Another solution is to switch back to MonoBook. --Ciencia Al Poder (talk) -WikiDex 19:51, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I hate the enhanced summary and the annoyance it does by shrinking my text edit box, i like my 30 lines. For that reason and only that i use mostly monobook, just go to monaco to check certain stuff --


 * Yes, it's Wikia's policy to not allow users to shitch off certain features. This is how long takes the developers to make an extension to let the users disable it via preferences: . 15 lines of code without counting comments. --Ciencia Al Poder (talk) -WikiDex 15:30, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Is there a roll out plan?
It appears this new editor is rolling out to some wikia wikis, but not others. It would be nice to see a roll out plan. I personally kind of hate the new editor also, but it has potential. I just wish there was some kind of announcement rather than just foisting it on smaller wikis. It could use alot of work in the usability department, but it "looks nice". -- Fandyllic  (talk &middot; contr) 12:55 PM PST 20 Mar 2009
 * maybe i have made a possible answer Forum:Was there an announcement about a new edit toolbar? to keep it the answers centralize. --
 * See the above link for a fuller answer from myself, too. 22:43, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Visual editor would be great until it has fixed all those weird bugs and allow newbies to type or  directly without switching the visual editor off. Visual editor keeps messing up my pages so I have to clean up after the mess. But many newbies are too afraid to edit in source mode so I have to live with it. --MyBrute Resource Center@Ronga 17:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Question
Well first of all, I like doing instead of pressing a button and typing in what I want. Same things for links. Also, what about fourth level headers? Also is there a way to default to code instead of basically looking at the page when you're looking at it?

So in the new editor, for the most part you're looking at the page you want to edit. So you see links a block instead of Foo. It's confusing and whenever there's something you can't do you have to press code and if you forget it automatically adds. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 15:46, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * There is a way to change back to the wikitext - the button on the top right switches back to the old editor (or essentially the old editor). You can also disable it via user preferences, which makes the old editor come back (but you can't switch to the new editor at will with this option). I'm hearing that they are currently working on fourth level header buttons and making some wikitext able to be added without it defaulting to the nowiki tags. Wjxhuang,  the 888th Avatar  {Talk} 16:00, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * If you are more experienced with the old editor, you can switch back from your preferences. Alternatively, you can find more help about the new editor on Help:New editor.
 * We are aware of the issue you bring up however, and they are one of our focuses for future improvement. 16:39, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

indenting bullets
How do you have multiple bullets using the new editor. For example:
 * text
 * text

Second question: The editor doesn't work if there's HTML comments. Is this intended or will this be fixed in the future? I have a widely used template in article space that inserts html comments and as a result, the wysiwyg won't work on these pages. w3stfa11 16:57, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Multiple bullets come from the indentation options (indent/outdent). The HTML comments restriction is known at the moment, and is something we plan to work on. The issue is of course that representing hidden comments in a WYSIWYG editor is somewhat ... contradictory :) But we'll find a way - likely via an icon you roll over, or something similar. 17:43, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Help Page Error
It says to disable the editor, "Tick the option to "Disable Rich Text Editing"." This is incorrect. In fact, one would "Untick the option to Enable Rich Text Editing"." --LordTBT Talk! 19:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Good spot - thanks! I'll update it. 20:08, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

embedded comments/ guidance to new contributors
It was our practice to enclose embedded comments using lines like:  Certainly we can hack this by creating dummy templates whose names correspond to these messages, but I was wondering if there is a different alternative that folks that have been using the editor may suggest. - ~  Ph l o x  20:40, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


 * One of our next features to work on is supporting comments within WYSIWYG mode in the new editor. This would still be several weeks out, but this is just a bit of forewarning :) 13:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Forms understand parameter semantics?
With semantic forms, we are able to specify acceptable values, input type (checkbox, pulldown list, etc), autocompletion lists and required values. Is there any way to do these sorts of things in the editor's form for templates? - ~  Ph l o x  20:40, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


 * We've not done a lot of work for semantic forms compatibility yet as it's still quite a niche product, but we realise it's becoming more widespread, and is something we're looking at. 13:22, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Honningkager.jpg understand about it being a niche product, but our interest in it is actually for generic database forms capability. If you could provide the same sort of declarable forms, then this would further amplify the ability of neophytes to contribute to a site.  Autocompletion and picklists of legal values via pulldowns or radio buttons are two important ones.   How exactly do you spell Denobula?  Some of this may be low hanging fruit for developers, as I see that the engine is able to perform some autocompletion even in the plain text editor.  Lots of good work the developers are doing.  The new editor is a major step forward, and I think we are much closer to the world where grandmothers will feel comfortable contributing their recipes on a wiki.  It really is a great endeavor.  If for no other reason, than to save for posterity Auntie Olga's fabulously scrumptious Christmas cookie recipe from Denmark.   So, thanks everyone for saving our cookies.  - ~  Ph l o <font color="#9EE8FA">x   16:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

can editor be used inside of semantic forms like FCKeditor?
Semantic forms supports using alternate editors with its free text editing box. Can the new editor be used in the same way described for the FCKeditor? - <font color="#0A9DC2">~  <font color="#0DC4F2">Ph <font color="#3DD0F5">l <font color="#6EDCF7">o <font color="#9EE8FA">x  20:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Problem with code
The current editor has some problems with the " " code in things like links, ==headlines== and others when not changed to the Wikitext source. Wikitext source should be the first option available, with the new being a option. --200.157.202.246 19:02, 19 June 2009 (UTC)