Preferred Post Formatting?

  •   18.6% - WYSIWYG (TinyMCE, for instance) - 58
  •   9.0% - Raw HTML - 28
  •   9.0% - MediaWiki - 28
  •   39.1% - BBCode - 122
  •   8.3% - Plaintext - 26
  •   1.9% - Markdown - 6
  •   3.2% - Textile - 10
  •   10.9% - Plaintext with minimal HTML - 34

You must login to post a comment. Don't have an account? Register to get one!

  • Avatar of flarecde flarecde Nov 12, 2008 at 20:38 UTC - 0 likes

    I favor BBCode myself as it's relatively close to HTML, which I know, without the security risks of plain HTML. I've never been able to understand wiki style coding and it's never been intuitive for me.

    I find WYSIWYG editors to be too buggy or unpredictable most of the time.

    Could support multiple types though, this commenting system seems to. Or is that too much overhead?

  • Avatar of Phanx Phanx Nov 12, 2008 at 01:26 UTC - 0 likes

    I despise WYSIWYG editors for the web. They are, without exception, slow, awkward, and difficult to use. For example, when in the middle of a list, there's generally no clear way to end the list and continue with a paragraph.

    While I don't particularly like BBCode or Wiki markup, they are, at least, completely transparent. My personal preference is for plaintext with some HTML, with the backend software handling basic things like paragraphs and line breaks.

  • Avatar of TreeRex TreeRex Nov 11, 2008 at 17:56 UTC - 0 likes
    I hate BBCode with a deep passion. Markdown is a win, and is easy to learn, IMHO.
  • Avatar of Kaelten Kaelten Nov 11, 2008 at 14:26 UTC - 0 likes

    really security is about the same for all of them. Each method, other than raw html and to some extent wysiwyg, are whitelist based approaches.

    WowAce.com & CurseForge.com Adminstrator
    Check out my new addon, OneChoice, it helps you pick quest rewards faster.
    Developer of Ace3, OneBag3, and many other addons and libraries
    Project lead and Mac developer for the Curse Client

  • Avatar of sztanpet sztanpet Nov 11, 2008 at 02:24 UTC - 0 likes

    from a security perspective bbcode is way easier, its a whitelist based aproach where you specify how it should work and so you dont have to worry about implementing a sanitizer for html tags which can have malformed html due to the liberal html parsing policies of many modern web browsers (and so, so many vectors of attack)

    also http://blogs.msdn.com/hackers/archive/2007/11/12/first-line-of-defense-for-web-applications-part-4.aspx

  • Avatar of Kaelten Kaelten Nov 11, 2008 at 00:43 UTC - 0 likes

    I also am in general against using wysiwyg. I honestly expect a lot of problems, extension limitations, diffs would become fairly useless, etc.

    Not to mention if the graceful failure path was to inputting raw html.

  • Avatar of ckknight ckknight Nov 11, 2008 at 00:42 UTC - 0 likes

    (replying to Dashkal) What we could do is support BBCode (or plaintext or something) as the default for people without Javascript, but if you do have it, load up the WYSIWYG parser.

  • Avatar of Kaelten Kaelten Nov 11, 2008 at 00:40 UTC - 0 likes

    I prefer shifting the content portions of the site into basically a huge namespaced wiki.

    My personal idea atm is to use a subset of mediawiki the provides all the needed functionality for the moment and then work our way forward as time goes on.

    Add to this a revamp to the other parsers and the addition of a few more and the ability to set your default preference in your profile and I think things would be good.

  • Avatar of Azethoth Azethoth Nov 11, 2008 at 00:36 UTC - 0 likes

    Well the things I miss are:

    • Some kind of link shortcut. [[SomePageName]] or whatever.
    • Some kind of common sandbox for the "wiki" pages. For instance, right now it sucks trying to find docs because it may be on curse, or some combo of curse + old.wowace. If its on old then its also outdated in general and I cannot even fix it without copying over stuff after getting added to a project. Some projects like AceConfig I should not and probably can not get added to and yet their pages scream for many little updates and consolidation of discussion thread tidbits into the docs + realistic linking between various pages.
    • This also does bring up the history and control wiki allows. Does the wysi stuff do the same? For some stuff it doesnt matter. Stuff like the actual Ace3 pages need more moderation probably.
    • Ideally there is seamless in-page browsing between project pages, forums, whatever "wiki" thing we use. Forums->something else pops up a new browser window at the moment which totally and completely sucks.
    • It would also be nice if subsidiary pages in the "wiki" can be seen. So for instance if ...myLib is the root, and there is myLib/API and myLib/Sample then I can somehow get a listing that has all 3 pages, regardless of the pages themselves linking properly.

    So I am happy with anything that accomodates all or most of this.

  • Avatar of Dashkal Dashkal Nov 11, 2008 at 00:32 UTC - 0 likes

    On further consideration I moved my vote to WYSIWYG. Much as I prefer to avoid js, a WYSIWYG formatter is simply easier to use. I do like the dual idea you mentioned, though.

Facts

Posted on
Nov 10, 2008
Voted on
312 times