4 ms·
Double BR's, DIVs used as containing elements... ugh. I was expecting better from Google. The problem of all RTE remains: their HTML is fucking ugly.
by flog 16y ago
Double BR's, DIVs used as containing elements... ugh. I was expecting better from Google.
The problem of all RTE remains: their HTML is fucking ugly.
- Yaggo 16y agoMy first thought was "finally working wysiwyg editor! It's from Google, it must be good!". After seeing the HTML output, I'm seriously disappointed. The editor is totally unsuitable e.g. for CMS, where you have to publish the generated HTML as such. So, back to looking for the holy grail of HTML editor.
- arethuza 16y agoThe Google one is pretty poor - enter some text and then indent it. The resulting HTML is browser-specific, Firefox produces: <div style="margin-left: 40px;">one</div> While IE produces: <BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr> one</BLOCKQUOTE> Having written code to normalize the junk produced by a simple contentEditable editor I hate this kind of thing - there are editors out there that produce relatively nice well-formed XHTML.