Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2010 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hi all!

The latest changes in the wiki made me a bit inefficient, so I both
re-enabled the editor and also would like to add my thoughts here.

Am Freitag, den 05.11.2010, 20:46 +0100 schrieb Stefan Weigel:
Hi Florian, *,

Am 05.11.2010 17:05, schrieb Florian Effenberger:

* There is currently no real WYSIWIG editor that works[1]. If there
were, Wikimedia would use it.

I'm happy to hear other opinions, but IMHO we *NEED* a WYSIWYG
editor. Many users will be very uncomfortable otherwise, so I'd even
take the risk of slightly defective pages in favor of WYSIWYG. I use
FCKEditor on another wiki of a customer, and it performs quite well.
I'm for it, but that's just my take. ;)

I personally would never use the WYSIWYG editor. I consider myself
as an average skilled user.

Do other users need one or ask for one? I don´t know.

Then do I :-) So why am I using a WYSIWYG editor: It is less about the
WYSIWYG, but ...

... the different access to features. I work a lot with tables, because
they provide easy access to structured data (being sortable etc.).
Inserting tables is easy, but to e.g. adding another column within the
table can you cost minutes fiddling in the source - the WYSIWYG editor
provides a "two clicks solution".

... the better (visual) navigation on the page. Although I do understand
the wiki syntax (and I edit the source quite often), I am still far away
from the guys in the movie Matrix. [1]

Some more things 

In an close-to-ideal world, a wiki features:
      * Something like a FCKEditor (, ...
      * providing different outline levels for lists, ...
      * easier category handling, ...
      * more stable copy/paste functionality, ...
      * something like a Navigator, ...
      * active spell checking, ...
      * and larger buttons.

Seems simple, or? :-)

However, I see Wikipedia without WYSIWYG and most Wikipedia authors
are definitely far away from being a hackers brain. ;-)

Other examples, and quite compareable to us, are
as well as the community wiki at They don´t have WYSIWYG

If a WYSIWYG editor is a risk to our content, I would recommend not
to have one. I´d rather recommend to use LibreOffice Writer and its
"Export to MediaWiki" functionality. :-)

That works more or less when creating a page. But working on a page that
gets changed quite regularly is rather impossible. Besides not having
the pictures, missing 

2 ct,


+2 ct


LibreOffice - Die Freiheit nehm' ich mir!


E-mail to for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.