CK Editor 5 Versus 4 for New User - ckeditor5

I have a more generic question. We want to install an editor in our application to allow teachers to teach others through learning posts. In order to accomplish this we plan to start with the classic ckeditor5 and then customize it to allow certain users to add things like science and math formulas, slide show presentations, etc.
Are we too early for this with CKE5? Should we stick with CKE4 and use the variety of plug-ins that are offered out of the box.
I just want to make sure CKE5 is ready for prime time.
Thanks so much for your response.

Ckeditor4 pros:
A lot of plugins available and easy to create custom plugin
UI customisation easy
A lot of pre-build skins available including Microsoft word 2013
Custom build can be easily made with online builder
CKeditor4 cons:
Difficult to implement with frameworks like react. Has to be implemented by creation script elements and appending to the DOM.
CKeditor5 pros:
Direct implementation with react possible with rpm packages.
Basic UI and toolbar looks a little better than ck4
CKeditor cons:
Very Less plugins available.
Plugins need to be installed as packages
UI customisation difficult

From Which editor is best:
The choice between the editors depends on the user’s specific needs
and requirements.
You should consider continuing using CKEditor 4 if the compatibility
with old browsers is a must for you or if features that are essential
for you are not yet available in CKEditor 5. However, being a totally
new editor, with time CKEditor 5 will have more and more features
developed and available for end users to benefit from. At the same
time, we are determined to continue the CKEditor 4 development and
maintenance for some good time still. The CKEditor 4.x line is under a
“Long Term Support” (LTS) programme which means that its development
and support is guaranteed until 2023, giving the users enough time to
make a move towards CKEditor 5.
If great user experience and clean UI are your priority and the
features currently available with CKEditor 5 Builds (Classic editor,
Inline editor, Balloon editor, Document editor) are sufficient for
your use case, then you should consider using CKEditor 5 Builds.
To find out more about CKEditor 5 Builds refer to the CKEditor 5 Builds documentation.
If you wish to create your own text editing solution and have full
control over every aspect of the editor, from UI to features, and the
possibility to enable real-time collaborative editing inside the
editor you should consider CKEditor 5 Framework.
To find out more about CKEditor 5 Framework refer to the CKEditor 5 Framework documentation.
From How to migrate from CKEditor 4 to CKEditor 5:
When compared to its predecessor, CKEditor 5 should be considered a
totally new editor. Every single aspect of it was redesigned — from
installation, to integration, to features, to its data model, and
finally to its API. Therefore, moving applications using a previous
CKEditor version to version 5 cannot be simply called an "upgrade". It
is something bigger, so the "migration" term fits better.
CKEditor 5's architecture and custom data model makes it possible to enable real-time collaborative editing.
In 2019 Chris Harris wrote this comment:
We have been using CKEditor 4 for some years, and since support is to
be dropped soon, I have just spent several days working on migrating
to CKEditor 5. This has been a frustrating experience, and as a
result, we will probably be moving to some other alternative instead.
My frustrations with CKEditor 5 include:
There are few features by default, and every new feature needs a different plugin, each one needing research and time to add in.
Adding plugins is not a simple download/install. Each one needs editing the main build config file, doing a rebuild, working out the
config we want, putting it in the build config file, building again.
None of which is difficult, but certainly more hassle than I would
expect.
CKeditor 4 had a re-sizeable window, CKEditor 5 doesn't. Adding CSS3 resizeable works, but had some odd effects when changing focus
from the editor to the page outside it (the window would resize to its
default size). I'm not saying that's the fault of CKEditor 5, but it's
another example where bringing it up to 4 level is not simple.
CKeditor 4 used inline element styling for e.g. floating an image left/right. CKEditor 5 doesn't, it adds a class to the element. So the
code produced by the editor doesn't work right without additional
styling, which adds complication to the deployment of the code it
produces.
My research suggests I'm not the only one who would like a simple
download that provided the same functionality as CKEditor 4, but it's
not available - by design. And I've come to the conclusion that the
design of CKeditor 5 has been driven ideologically, providing
something that the creators think developers ought to want - rather
than something they really do want.
See more on:
What is different about CKEditor 5 compared to CKEditor 4?
CKEditor FAQ
Migration from CKEditor
Bringing collaborative editing to any application

Related

Bootstrap-based but accessible template (WCAG 2.0 compliant) [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
I am building an admin style, data-driven, internal business application (as opposed to a public facing website). I'd like to use a Bootstrap based template (even considering for-purchase templates from a Bootstrap marketplace or something), but the key requirement is that the site must be accessible (WCAG 2.0 AA compliant).
I know Bootstrap has had some accessibility issues (some colors, some javascript, etc.), but I also know that a lot of that has been getting better as newer versions were getting released. Bootstrap documentation itself offers only a small section on Accessibility and no mention of WCAG 2.0. Does anyone know what the latest status is for accessibility and Bootstrap (ver 3.3.7 at the moment)?
I've also come across Accessible+, which is a Bootstrap-based template, but I'm not sure whether the design fits well for the application I'm building, as it seems more public-facing (product/sales based). But it might work.
Alternatively, does anyone have any other Bootstrap based templates to recommend (free or not) which would work well for my need here, while also being very accessible?
I develop and maintain custom bootstrap websites that emphasize WCAG 2.0 AA compliance, but I'm looking for a good Bootstrap based template from which I can develop smaller projects without investing the time for a custom project.
One thing I'm noticing is that the few templates and themes out there advertising as WCAG 2.0 AA / 508 Compliant are NOT actually compliant, including Accessible+. Using the online WebAIM tool on their template it's registering 8 WCAG 2.0 AA coding errors, 16 alerts, and 4 contrast errors on the front page.
The WebAIM online tool is just a starting point, even getting zero errors on the tool does not make a site "compliant" there is no such thing as a "compliant" website ... the criteria is subjective. There are less and compliant and more compliant sites.
Validating with the WebAIM tool does definitely make a site more compliant. To get any sort of certification that a site is compliant actual lab testing by individuals with disabilities is required. Even then, a site can get a certification from the third party that does the testing, there is no universal compliance stamp that the Dept of Justice would refer to if a complaint was filed for a site.
Another thing I've found is that one needs to be careful about what third party to use for a certification of a site. Some are very expensive and do not necessarily have much credibility. The non-profit WebAIM program at Utah State University is one of the most credible and reasonably priced. Their site also offers some of the best overall information about web accessorily and compliance. Note, I have no affiliation whatsoever with that organization other than attending training there.
I'm in the same situation. I'm not sure about how the accesibility of Bootstrap has been improved since the 3.1.1. version.
I also saw the Accessible+ template, but it has been not updated since January, and I'm not sure if can fit what I need, so paying for it will be my last option.
These were my two main options:
Assets CMS GOV Framework. Its a modification of Bootstrap 3.1.1 with accesibility improvements to acomplish with the section 508 compliance (kind of USA govern alternative to WCGA 2.0, but a little less restrictive than WCGA AA). You can find it here http://assets.cms.gov/resources/framework/3.4.1/Pages/ the problem is that the package is just a bunch of folders with different scripts, styles, etc and I don't know where to start. I took a look to a previous version of the framework http://assets.cms.gov/resources/framework/2.0/Pages/ which was based on Bootstrap 2 and those files seems more like the kind of content I was expecting to find when I download it. So... after a couple of hours thinking if all those folders in the package wehere modificated, or where the originals and how to start, I declined about it... Maybe you can see it more clear.
The other option, which I'm starting to use, is the current Bootstrap version, with the Paypal Bootstrap plugin for accesibility https://github.com/paypal/bootstrap-accessibility-plugin. This seems more clear for me to figure out how to use, but is from 2 years ago and I don't have too much hope about it.
Anyway... both options are from a couple of years ago. I spent two days searching for anything else but seems that nobody cares a lot about accessibility nowadays. Several changes in accesibility have been implemented on Bootstrap since 3.1.1 but I think still can be far from be ready for a WCAG 2.0 AA.
In Bootstrap 4 beta seems to be more accesibillity improvements, but I don't know if they are enough to accomplish the WCAG 2.0 AA standards.
It will be good to know if you find something interesting!!
Disclaimer: I am the author of Accessible+ accessible bootstrap template as linked here by the question opener.
Accessible+ is in fact based on ASSETS which is based on Bootstrap.
I developed it because there were no Bootstrap accessible options available.
The main purpose was a regular template for "non-admin" websites.
Since I did not get overwhelming requests for doing an Admin template version, I never took the time to design one. But - I might in the future.
In any case, I can offer personal customization, even if you ask me to just make you a general "skeleton" for admin side.
Thanks for choosing to buy the template, I know it doesn't suit your needs 100% and I hope you succeed in converting it the way you need.
I was searching as well in the past for an accessible Bootstrap 4 template but found nothing. The ones I found failed in most accessibility tests.
Recently though, I searched again and found the "Labinator A11y-Bootstrap" template. It is basically an accessible Bootstrap 4 premium template that satisfies the WCAG 2.1 Level AAA guidelines. It also comes with an accessibility toolbar.
If you need though a free template and have good coding knowledge, then any modern Bootstrap 4 template can be made accessible with proper expertise in web development and accessibility. You can start by reading the official accessibility page of Bootstrap at (https://getbootstrap.com/docs/4.4/getting-started/accessibility/) then familiarize yourself with the WCAG 2.1 Level AA/AAA guidelines. There are some helpful checklists for those online, especially at the official website of WCAG.
Thereafter, you have to test your template with several web accessibility tools and verify the results manually. Two good tools are AChecker.ca and wave.webaim.org. Please note that all current web accessibility tools are not perfectly accurate - take them with a grain of salt. They can serve as a good pointer in the right direction rather than an ultimate guide.
It is good to note as well that Bootstrap 4+ is much better in terms of accessibility than Bootstrap 3+. As a full-time web developer working in the field, I would never pick Bootstrap 3+ or any template based on it when we have the modern Bootstrap 4.
I hope that helps!

Determining mininium files required for dojo widget

First off, I'm brand new to Dojo.
I'm integrating it into our existing web app.
We initially only need the Calendar widget functionality.
I'm looking to keep the number and size of files as small as possible.
I don't believe downloading just the base code file will be sufficent?
http://dojotoolkit.org/download/
Additionally, the Dojo toolkit download is a huge zip (Even if I was to only use compressed files)
Am I left with downloading the toolkit and manually removing everything I don't need?
Is there no custom download builder like jquery ui?
Well, the dojo library is much larger than jquery ui and I don't know of an equivalent to the download builder. If you are just interested in using dojo for a single widget, you might consider exploring a different library.
To use dojox/Calendar, you are still going to need the many dependencies it has on other dojo modules. You can do this manually, but it will be tedious.
One thing you can do is run dojo's build system to package dojox/Calendar and all of its dependencies into a single file. This isn't a trivial task and requires a good understanding of dojo's AMD loader and package system.
If you want to go down this route, I would clone the dojo-boilerplate project on github. It contains everything you need to do this out of the box. Then follow the build system tutorial to understand how you set this up. From there you can have your app depend on dojox/Calendar to produce the file you include on your page to consume it.
I suggest that you put the whole thing (yes, it's a lot of tiny files) to your server.
Dojo 1.9 is written so that when users visit, their computers will only download the individual pieces on an as-needed basis. This is possible because every piece (AMD modules) is explicit about what it needs.
Once you have something that works, you can choose speed-up loading times by using the build system. Basically, this involves going: "If the user wants this thing, they'll probably want all this other stuff, so create a big minified lump and give it to them whenever they start asking." Best of all, it doesn't have to be perfect: If you miss including something, the users browser will still request it a la carte.
At work we're using the Dojo Boilerplate starting application which helps give some initial organization to the build process.

How to use Ext-designer to create UI for multiple pages?

In the example section in extjs4 official site, the source code is clean and direct (on a single page). However the ext designer uses MVC architecture that I am quite confused.
If I want to create UI using extjs 4, for multiple page, am I supposed to create multiple projects in ext designer?
I think these are two seperate questions '1. should I use MVC' and '2. Why does Designer NOT use MVC'.
In my opinion that answer to 1. should be 'yes' unless you project is relatively small and you feel comfy managing the entire codebase in one long file. This quickly becomes unmanagable and there is a lot of searching needed to locate the section you're after.
The answer to 2. is that designer is aimed to provide designers (funnily enough!) who often won't have any coding experience the ability to create prototypes and templates that developers can pick apart and build into applications. At least that was true with designer version 1.
I believe designer 2 is aimed much much at being able to directly port code into applications but if you're talking about version 1 I think you will need to take the code generated by the designer and move it into an MVC style structure in order to build applications which are anything more than a couple of simple pages.

What Rich text editor should I use for a custom CMS

I want to build a custom CMS where users a Rich text editor is the main way to create content rather than wiki markup.
Besides stability and performance, I want the RTE to be easily extensible. The latter point is very important because I intend to extend it to my needs.
For example I want the users to be able to embed OpenSocial gadgets and whiteboard (based on canvas) into the page. I also the want the users to embed media source like (youtube, slideshare etc).
My preliminary investigation shows that Dojo's (dijit) RTE and TinyMCE are pretty good. How would you compare the two in terms of stability, performance and extensibility. Any other RTE's I should be looking at that fit the bill?
PS: I am using dojo as the main js library.
Hava a look here (blog post with some very helpfull informations).
My own opinion is that there are two free available rtes that are close to each other in comparison. Those are CKEditor and Tinymce. My experience lies on the tinymce side and i can say that the extensibility using own plugins is great with it. Some independent tests have shown that tinymce seems to be more adavanced than CKEditor, others claim CKEditor is better. You will have to decide on your own (development is advancing further each day and new functionality has been developed since those tests).
You may also have a look here for comparisons and discussions:
http://verens.com/2007/09/27/fckeditor-vs-tinymce-vs-everything-else/
http://verens.com/2007/09/27/fckeditor-vs-tinymce-vs-everything-else/
http://www.mediacurrent.com/blog/wysiwyg-shootout-and-winner

Switching from ExtJS3 to ExtJS4: Worth the hassle?

We are in the middle of a relatively large project which uses ExtJS3 and have already invested ~4 man-years, using several plugins and we have written some plugins ourselfs. After a quick glance at ExtJS4, it seems that we would have a lot of work to do to migrate the project to ExtJS4. Are there any strong reasons to switch to ExtJS4? Currently, it seems to me that compatibility with future browsers (or the lack thereof) is the only one.
We're in similar situation and our conclusion was to wait a bit more as Ext 3 is doing it's job. We experienced many problems in our "test" migration and I would say that it's more a rewrite of the application than a migration :(. Also, our experience showed that Ext JS 4 has some performance problems, forms are a bit different, store cannot reject changes, it's bigger. There are some very good new features like the new class system, mixins, new charts, ...
We have upgraded our application to ExtJS4 without fail.We are happy to say that ExtJS4 is fast compare to ExtJS3.A new class system,mixins,plugin-free charts,focus management...etc.,. But if you want to upgrade you need to change a lot of code because class system and config options are changed.We have tested the performance of our application using ExtJS3 and ExtJS4,so as per our observation ExtJS4 is fast and it will not break.As per our observation,CSS selectors are also changed if you want to customize the component you can easily do the thing in ExtJS4.
We tried to migrate from ExtJS3 to ExtJS4 previous week. Unfortunately I must say it is like translate english to german. A lot of work. From our point of view more or less just the charting system is plus, minus - a lot of components that we use are not supported, a lot of css customization shoud be done, working code in ExtJS3 breaks easily and there is sometimes almost impossible to find an error.
Not an expert but personally I'd start new project with extjs4 but leave exiting project alone. The charting stuff is amazing in 4!