[wp-hackers] wpautop is NOT the problem.
chip at chipbennett.net
Fri Mar 18 16:06:31 UTC 2011
Does filtering the TinyMCE $init array not work?
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Kevin Newman <CaptainN at unfocus.com> wrote:
> 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,
> 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.
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Kevin Newman<CaptainN at unfocus.com>
>> 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
>>> nor is the server side (php) implementation. If I just use the text
>>> and save back to the server, things tend to work out.
>>> triggered between TinyMCE and the HTML tab.
>>> The question then is, how to make this work more consistently like the
>>> 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
>>> wpautop is actually complaints about the client side implementation of
>>> 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
>> wp-hackers mailing list
>> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
More information about the wp-hackers