[pmwiki-users] wysiwyg editor for wiki

John Rankin john.rankin at affinity.co.nz
Thu Jul 20 19:40:15 CDT 2006


On Friday, 21 July 2006 9:58 AM, Chris Cox <ccox at airmail.net> wrote:
><snip>
>
>Just think... what is bold?  Bold is whatever the custom
>style/css says it is on my box, which could change depending
>on the context inside of any given wiki, any group, any page,
>inside of any page.  Just an example.

I think this example supports the argument for WYSIWYM.

In a WYSIWYM environment, bold is not one of the choices. As you
correctly point out, it is a local display choice, not a statement
about meaning. And bold has no meaning at all to somebody using
a screen reader. This is of course why PmWiki doesn't, in fact,
support "bold", although casual writers may think it does.
(Although they can use a style to insist on it, if they choose.)

A WYSIWYM editor will allow a writer to specify that some text 
is to be emphasised. The display during the editing process 
may bear no relation to the way a particular reader (or listener)
experiences it. It *doesn't matter* how it gets displayed.
The editor only has to provide a signal that it has noted the
writer's request and honoured it.

>
>This is a much, much, much harder issue UNLESS you make
>tons of assumptions or greatly limit (hinder) site
>customizations.

Not true. Have a look at the Serna or Lyx editors. If
anything, it will allow even more richness.

Once you let go of WYSIWYG as the goal and focus on what 
Pico calls "the huge gap that currently exists between our 
editing interface and output", the problem becomes much
more tractable.

Lyx in particular is a great example of what can be achieved
in a print-oriented writing environment.
>
>People who want WYSIWYG need/want a much more limited wiki than
>PmWiki.  Or at least a PmWiki with a fixed (unchangeable) style
>and possibly a set of procedural rules.

Again, I think Pico's post is spot on. People use the term
WYSIWYG because that's the easiest way to articulate the issue
that troubles them. But we make a mistake if we interpret it
literally. So I am much more optimistic and don't think it 
implies a restricted editing environment.

However, I also note Pm's caution about the current state of
web technology being a constraint. I'm just impatient!
-- 
JR
--
John Rankin







More information about the pmwiki-users mailing list