[wp-hackers] wpautop is NOT the problem.

[Kevin Newman]

That's correct, you will run into problems. But why is it like that? It 
doesn't have to be - if I disable the WordPress JS, TinyMCE doesn't mess 
with my stuff. From what I can tell, it seems like it should be quite 
possible to have it both ways - it would take a source formatting step, 
followed by autop and nop.

There are other things an async call to the server would solve, besides 
just making it consistent - for example, there are some hooks (adding 
elements to the block element list) that are ignored client side (and 
the way the js function is written, access to that list is almost 
impossible, unless you really really know JavaScript). An async call to 
the server side wpautop could theoretically fix that.

Kevin N.


On 3/18/2011 11:19 AM, Chip Bennett wrote:
> If you're switching between Visual and HTML editors, and you haven't
> customized your TinyMCE configuration, you *WILL* run into problems.
>
> I would suggest either not switching between editors, or else customizing
> your TinyMCE configuration such that you avoid the changes that it makes
> when switching from HTML to Visual.
>
> Chip
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Kevin Newman<CaptainN at unfocus.com>  wrote:
>
>> So after looking into this more carefully, to try and disable what I
>> thought was the problem, I don't think the idea of wpautop is the problem,
>> nor is the server side (php) implementation. If I just use the text editor,
>> and save back to the server, things tend to work out.
>>
>> The problem seems to be the javascript implementation of wpautop that is
>> triggered between TinyMCE and the HTML tab.
>>
>> The question then is, how to make this work more consistently like the PHP
>> version.
>>
>> I think this could be handled with an Ajax call to the actual server side
>> wpautop. But the JS version actually addresses another problem, which is
>> that content coming out of TinyMCE needs to be formatted (it's also doing
>> some other kind of filtering that I haven't looked closely enough at to
>> understand yet) - that could be handled separately before or after the
>> server side wpautop tag-back.
>>
>> Anyway, has anyone looked into this? I'd be a lot of the complaining about
>> wpautop is actually complaints about the client side implementation of it,
>> and not about wpautop in general.
>>
>> I'd be happy to attempt a solution, if there is any interest.
>>
>> Kevin N.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> wp-hackers mailing list
>> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
>> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
>>
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers