I'm using Rich Text Editor with MiscTools plugin to edit text in CQ%
However when I open the HTML editor and create sth like this
<div id="test">Test <!-- Test Comment --></div>
the CQ rewrites it to after switch back to HTML mode and source edit mode
<div id="test">Test </div>
Is it possible to keep HTML comment tag <!-- --> in the source code?
Thank you for answer my question
I would suggest taking it out of the div and see if that works.
In CQ5.4-5.6.1 (not sure about latest version AEM6), the Rich Text Editor intentionally strips out all HTML comments. The only way to stop it from doing this is to modify the product javascript source code in WhitespaceProcessor.js. However, allowing HTML comments in this way wouldn't be recommended as it hasn't been fully tested it might cause other errors. If you still need this feature, then you might consider contacting Adobe Customer Care to request it to be officially added to the product.
Related
My editors want to have an ability to edit raw html within editor.
For example, we can have simple list markup:
<ul>
<li>Some text<li>
</ul>
Or with custom classes and event tags:
<ul>
<li class="my_class">Some text
<span class="special">Some additional info</span>
<li>
</ul>
And so on.
I know that built-in Draftail doesnt support html editing.
But using third-party editor comes with problem:
Losing integration with system. For example, i cant just put image like with draftail. Or, preview mode cant handle all functionality of third-party editor.
So, maybe someone has working solution for this situation.
I thought about using special StreamField panels, but it seems to be overhead of blocks. Dont like this idea of having lots of blocks with little differences
Wagtail does not support raw HTML editing within the page editor out of the box intentionally. The philosophy (zen) of Wagtail is to help editors and developers 'wear the right hat' when working in Wagtail.
HTML editing is usually best provided to developers, where there is an expected knowledge of what is required for things like accessibility, security and the benefit of tooling (like git).
However, if HTML editing is a must, you will probably need to build your own editor field for that purpose or find a suitable package that works with HTML markup such as django-markupfield. Adding image/snippet/page chooser functionality however will have to be built for whatever you end up using. You may also want to look at the Wagtail markdown package either as an alternative to HTML or a starting point, it allows for a syntax of linking to pages/images.
Wagtail lets you use any kind of Django field or widget with the FieldPanel.
Please ensure you consider all the risks when implementing this feature, such as accessible HTML (e.g. heading levels), security (disallow some tags such as script tags), malformed HTML leaking into the rendered template and of course the end user experience.
At the end i made my own solution
Simple rewrite some methods in wagtail`s Html DbWhiteLister and HtmlConverter.
This gives me an opportunity to allow any tags with any attributes.
https://github.com/Chenger1/wagtailtinymce.-Full-Rich-Text-Editor
I would like to have a translation in my messages_en.properties containing a link, which opens in a new tab. Is there a way to do this?
I already tried to add
<a target="_blank" href="http://example.com">Example</a>
and
<a href="#" onclick='window.open("http://example.com");return false;'>Example</a>
without success.
Thanks in advance
Most likely your HTML isn't working because of kcSanitize in the template file. Wherever HTML messages are allowed, Keycloak's FreeMarker templates will also wrap the text with this method which:
Allows sanitizing of html that uses Freemarker ?no_esc. This way, html
can be allowed but it is still cleaned up for safety. Tags and
attributes deemed unsafe will be stripped out.
The no_esc allows HTML to render (by not being escaped) but the kcSanitize strips unsafe tags and attributes first. In my testing, I found that "target" and "onclick" are stripped out.
One way that works but that I wouldn't recommend for safety is removing the kcSanitize() around where your message displays in the corresponding .ftl file.
Another idea is adding an id or class to the element in your .properties file and using custom Javascript to set the target="_blank" attribute.
We're experiencing some inconsistency with URLs on our publish instance. Some links are having the /content/project/ removed whilst others are not.
The /etc/map has been created and seems to be working as expected, except for these links.
An example of where the rewriting is links in the OOTB Text component.
Just highlighted the text and used the hyperlink in the RTE.
The output HTML on publish comes through as the desired
<a adhocenable="false" href="/path/support.html">My Link</a>
A link that's not being rewritten is from a component, in it's dialog we have a richtext xtype that is referenced in the jsp
<cq:text property="description">
This however is output on the publish as:
<a adhocenable="false" href="/content/project/path/support.html">Other Link</a>
I've had a look in /system/console/configMgr and the Day CQ Link Transformer Checker and this has a:href, area:href, from:action, input:value. So I thought this would pick up the links under anchors.
If anyone can suggest where I should be looking to resolve this, any help would be appreciated.
Upon further investigations I noticed that the links that were not working were contained in tags, and therefore not rewritten by AEM
I'm using NetBeans as my IDE for a Ember.js project. When I create handlebars templates in my app like below the code highlighting doesn't work correctly.
<script type="text/x-handlebars">
<div>
</div>
</script>
Normally, when I'd select the first div, it and its matching end tag would highlight yellow, but this doesn't work. Since its inside the handlebars script tag both are highlighted red as errors and don't match together. This makes writing complex templates kinda annoying as it can be difficult to pinpoint syntax errors.
Is there anyway to get NetBeans to highlight inside the handlebars tag as if its regular html?
One option, until Netbeans implements this enhancement, is to add the following script tag in index.html immediately after your reference to jQuery:
<script src="js/libs/jquery.js"></script>
<!-- use following line to change script type to 'text/x-handlebars' -->
<script>jQuery('script[type="text/html"]').attr('type', 'text/x-handlebars');</script>
This is a variation of the answer provided by GCoda.
I had the same problem and tried various non satisfying fixes.
In the end I figured the best solution is simply to change the script's type attribute to text/html:
<script type="text/html">
<div>
</div>
</script>
I got same problem. And i just used a some kind of postprocessing, i am using node.js, so i did res.send(data.replace(/type="text\/html"/g,'type="text/x-handlebars"')); on my / page.
I think you can do something similar in you language, and ofcource this is not a fix, just an ugly trick to make developing more easy. Dont keep it in production.
I have been looking into why WYSIWYG editors are bad for content creation. The most common reason given is that they output incorrect html. But what if I use editors with reduced functionality?
My requirements are only the ability to italicize, make text bold, create ordered/unordered lists and (maybe at a later date) add inline images.
My users will hopefully be 'persistent' users (small numbers of laypersons using the app frequently)
In this context how do I choose between Markdown (WMD editor) & a stripped down WYSIWYG editor. How would page performance be affected with each? I consider fidelity & reproduciblity of data to be important.
You choose by considering your audience. Wiki markup and markdown is for geeks. Your customers sound like they're probably not geeks so I would suggest CKEditor or Twiki-style editor (good, simple Wysiwyg UI) for non-geek users.
Basic concern: Why force lay-people to learn a markup language when solid alternatives exist?
See the Custom Toolbar editor in this CKEditor demo. Or check out TinyMCE.
OK, I tested both.
Even for my basic formatting requirements, CKEditor generated quite ghastly html
Now this is the input
This actually appears to be better
I hope users understand what we are doing
Lets see
But in the meantime
CKEditor Output
<p> This actually appears to be better</p>
<p> I hope users understand what we are doing</p>
<p> Lets see</p>
<p> </p>
<p> But in the meantime</p>
And Markdown Output
<p>This actually appears to be better <br>
I hope users understand what we are doing <br>
Lets see</p>
<p>But in the meantime</p>
Now if this is the difference between these two for the most basic formatting (linebreaks and paragraphs), what will it be like in a 200 word submission. I think most users will need to know only this
For line breaks, two SPACES and hit ENTER.
For new paragraphs, hit ENTER twice
The rest of the stuff could be learnt incrementally
Is it that hard to engineer a 'basic' WYSIWYG editor?
EDIT
After adding these to config.js above problem is solved
config.enterMode = CKEDITOR.ENTER_BR;
config.shiftEnterMode = CKEDITOR.ENTER_P;