5 ms·

How does it compare with other modern solutions like https://quilljs.com/ https://quilljs.com/?

jhchen 9y ago
Author of Quill here. Interested in hearing Marjin’s thoughts but here are some of my main observation is at a high level Prosemirror is much more willing than Quill to sacrifice simplicity for power. This value difference manifests in the target audience, architecture and API design: Quill can be used for the get going quickly drop in use case. Prosemirror specifically warns against this: “If you're looking for a simple drop-in rich text editor component, ProseMirror is probably not what you need. (We do hope that such components will be built on top of it.) The library is optimized for demanding, highly-integrated use cases, at the cost of simplicity.” Prosemirror’s schema, as documented, is more flexible than Quill’s. Prosemirror appears to allow anything, whereas Quill imposes some constraints. For example Quill requires all nodes to either be a leaf and cannot have children or a container and must at least one child. There cannot be a node that can optionally have children as is allowed in Prosemirror. In my experience the constraints Quill imposes lead to a more consistent and bug free experience across browsers. I will be curious to try out the edge cases I have encountered at this new 1.0 Prosemirror to see if it handles them the way an end user typist would expect. If Quill can benefit from a shift in the flexibility in its schema, it will do so. Quill is far more battle tested. Slack, Salesforce, LinkedIn, Intuit and many others are using Quill in their main user-facing production products, not an internal employee only tool. Prosemirror has a great start with the NY Times but there is a large difference in adoption at the moment.
- marijn 9y ago
  > Interested in hearing Marjin’s [sic] thoughts Sure. I think it's fair to say that ProseMirror is a more ambitious project, reaching for features that aren't part of (even the new crop of) existing libraries. * Firstly, the schema feature. ProseMirror's content expressions [1] are a regular language that can be used to describe a sequence of child nodes. The editor will make sure the content of the node always matches this expression. This allows significantly more interesting things than Quill's array of allowed children—i.e. "heading block＊ section＊" to say that a given node must first contain a heading, then any number of blocks (say, paragraph, list, figure, aside, etc), then any number of subsections. (HN's half assed markup doesn't seem to allow escapes on asterisks, so I used ＊'s) * Quill uses imperative data structures and events throughout. I've really become convinced of the power of functional Redux-style architectures for this kind of component—I've found it makes it much easier to write bullet-proof extensions. (This may be a matter of taste.) * Table support doesn't appear to exist in Quill yet. A table module with features like colspan/rowspan and cell selections has been written as a relatively small plugin [2] for ProseMirror. * Exposing all the system interals (and designing them in a way that makes them usable), rather than hiding stuff behind a small API, means that people can do really advanced things as extensions. This was a lot of work, and wasn't initially planned, but the kind of users we're aiming for require it. * As for real-world use, yeah, we've just released 1.0, your project is older. Still, our users (including Atlassian, which has already rolled out ProseMirror in user-facing products) have been doing very advanced stuff already, and my ten years of experience with CodeMirror mean that I more or less know what I'm going to run into. [1]: http://prosemirror.net/docs/guide/#schema.content_expressions http://prosemirror.net/docs/guide/#schema.content_expression... [2]: https://github.com/prosemirror/prosemirror-tables https://github.com/prosemirror/prosemirror-tables (Also your website claims, wrt to ProseMirror: "Quill’s architecture is more modular, allowing for easier customization of internals. Core modules that handle basic functionality like copy/paste and undo/redo can be swapped out in Quill." I think that's a mischaracterization.)
  - hitekker 9y ago
    Also, ProseMirror is definitely seeing wider adoption than the parent implies. Even from this thread alone, we're seeing Atlassian and startups pop-up attesting to its good design. Your points are fundamentally correct, and I would argue that your parent is attempting to limit the potential of ProseMirror, in order to preserve the need for Quill.
    - accordionclown 9y ago
      there's more than enough room for everyone. indeed, there will be demand for more/different products even after both of these competitors maximize their reach.
      - hitekker 9y ago
        The issue isn't so much about room as it is about bandwidth. Specifically, mental bandwidth. There use to be loads and loads of JS frameworks of dubious merit and with equally dubious developers. Now there's generally an agreed upon few (Angular 2.0, React, Vue) that are pretty solid and seem to be helmed by mostly sensible people. Unfortunately, we're still in the early stages of open-source WYSWIG/WYSWIM;. By the later stages, I hope we can thin out the technically unsound editors with insecure authors.
hitekker 9y ago
I wouldn't use Quill. The developers are passive-aggressive to the notion of rendering Quill content outside of the Quill Editor, having ripped out the APIs to do so from newer versions, and silencing conversations in their Github Issues. You can see the latest flare-ups here: https://github.com/quilljs/quill/issues/993 https://github.com/quilljs/quill/issues/993 The project also has secondary smells such as inventing weird names for existing concepts; 'Delta', for example instead of 'data source' or something more intelligible. Lastly, it markets itself as feature-complete, but has failed to implement support for something as basic as tables, which have been repeatedly requested for the past 3 years. Personally, I would be afraid to build anything mission-critical upon it.
- jhchen 9y ago
  Quill is now a very popular project on Github, in the top 250 of all projects. A lot of people want to add their two cents to popular project and unfortunately the volume is far too high for a) me to respond to every single attempt at adding said cents and b) Github Issues's linear commenting UI makes all attempts at adding two cents confusing and cluttering. With this I prioritize the question that was asked, and specifically the concerns the OP raises. I have repeated many times that the removal of getHTML was because it was a passthrough function that added no additional value to Quill. You can look at the code history and the implementation of getHTML to confirm this fact. It has nothing to do with the desire to remove functionality as no functionality was removed. I'm confused why Delta is a bad name, since the word delta means change, variation or difference and that's seems to describe what it is: a change to Quill's content. Data source on the other hand is unspecific and even misleading. Naming is hard though and other readers can find out what Deltas are here https://quilljs.com/docs/delta/ https://quilljs.com/docs/delta/ and decide for themselves. Tables was reported as a feature request by me early in the project life because it is a known feature of Word but only years later did users indicated strong interest in it in Sept 2016. I believe in community contribution to open source so I decided to give the community a chance to build it so I wrote offered detailed implementation guidance: https://github.com/quilljs/quill/issues/117#issuecomment-244575777 https://github.com/quilljs/quill/issues/117#issuecomment-244.... The fact that this user had seemingly urgent need for it and was employed by a large public company with resources also contributed to this decision. Valuable exchanges were had in the Issue and multiple users has fully implemented it for their companies to varying levels of feature richness depending on their requirements. An official canonical implementation is coming in 2.0: https://medium.com/@jhchen/the-state-of-quill-and-2-0-fb38db7a59b9 https://medium.com/@jhchen/the-state-of-quill-and-2-0-fb38db....

Author of Quill here. Interested in hearing Marjin’s thoughts but here are some of my main observation is at a high level Prosemirror is much more willing than Quill to sacrifice simplicity for power. This value difference manifests in the target audience, architecture and API design: Quill can be used for the get going quickly drop in use case. Prosemirror specifically warns against this: “If you're looking for a simple drop-in rich text editor component, ProseMirror is probably not what you need. (We do hope that such components will be built on top of it.) The library is optimized for demanding, highly-integrated use cases, at the cost of simplicity.” Prosemirror’s schema, as documented, is more flexible than Quill’s. Prosemirror appears to allow anything, whereas Quill imposes some constraints. For example Quill requires all nodes to either be a leaf and cannot have children or a container and must at least one child. There cannot be a node that can optionally have children as is allowed in Prosemirror. In my experience the constraints Quill imposes lead to a more consistent and bug free experience across browsers. I will be curious to try out the edge cases I have encountered at this new 1.0 Prosemirror to see if it handles them the way an end user typist would expect. If Quill can benefit from a shift in the flexibility in its schema, it will do so. Quill is far more battle tested. Slack, Salesforce, LinkedIn, Intuit and many others are using Quill in their main user-facing production products, not an internal employee only tool. Prosemirror has a great start with the NY Times but there is a large difference in adoption at the moment.

marijn 9y ago
> Interested in hearing Marjin’s [sic] thoughts Sure. I think it's fair to say that ProseMirror is a more ambitious project, reaching for features that aren't part of (even the new crop of) existing libraries. * Firstly, the schema feature. ProseMirror's content expressions [1] are a regular language that can be used to describe a sequence of child nodes. The editor will make sure the content of the node always matches this expression. This allows significantly more interesting things than Quill's array of allowed children—i.e. "heading block＊ section＊" to say that a given node must first contain a heading, then any number of blocks (say, paragraph, list, figure, aside, etc), then any number of subsections. (HN's half assed markup doesn't seem to allow escapes on asterisks, so I used ＊'s) * Quill uses imperative data structures and events throughout. I've really become convinced of the power of functional Redux-style architectures for this kind of component—I've found it makes it much easier to write bullet-proof extensions. (This may be a matter of taste.) * Table support doesn't appear to exist in Quill yet. A table module with features like colspan/rowspan and cell selections has been written as a relatively small plugin [2] for ProseMirror. * Exposing all the system interals (and designing them in a way that makes them usable), rather than hiding stuff behind a small API, means that people can do really advanced things as extensions. This was a lot of work, and wasn't initially planned, but the kind of users we're aiming for require it. * As for real-world use, yeah, we've just released 1.0, your project is older. Still, our users (including Atlassian, which has already rolled out ProseMirror in user-facing products) have been doing very advanced stuff already, and my ten years of experience with CodeMirror mean that I more or less know what I'm going to run into. [1]: http://prosemirror.net/docs/guide/#schema.content_expressions http://prosemirror.net/docs/guide/#schema.content_expression... [2]: https://github.com/prosemirror/prosemirror-tables https://github.com/prosemirror/prosemirror-tables (Also your website claims, wrt to ProseMirror: "Quill’s architecture is more modular, allowing for easier customization of internals. Core modules that handle basic functionality like copy/paste and undo/redo can be swapped out in Quill." I think that's a mischaracterization.)
- hitekker 9y ago
  Also, ProseMirror is definitely seeing wider adoption than the parent implies. Even from this thread alone, we're seeing Atlassian and startups pop-up attesting to its good design. Your points are fundamentally correct, and I would argue that your parent is attempting to limit the potential of ProseMirror, in order to preserve the need for Quill.
  - accordionclown 9y ago
    there's more than enough room for everyone. indeed, there will be demand for more/different products even after both of these competitors maximize their reach.
    - hitekker 9y ago
      The issue isn't so much about room as it is about bandwidth. Specifically, mental bandwidth. There use to be loads and loads of JS frameworks of dubious merit and with equally dubious developers. Now there's generally an agreed upon few (Angular 2.0, React, Vue) that are pretty solid and seem to be helmed by mostly sensible people. Unfortunately, we're still in the early stages of open-source WYSWIG/WYSWIM;. By the later stages, I hope we can thin out the technically unsound editors with insecure authors.

hitekker 9y ago

I wouldn't use Quill. The developers are passive-aggressive to the notion of rendering Quill content outside of the Quill Editor, having ripped out the APIs to do so from newer versions, and silencing conversations in their Github Issues. You can see the latest flare-ups here: https://github.com/quilljs/quill/issues/993 https://github.com/quilljs/quill/issues/993 The project also has secondary smells such as inventing weird names for existing concepts; 'Delta', for example instead of 'data source' or something more intelligible. Lastly, it markets itself as feature-complete, but has failed to implement support for something as basic as tables, which have been repeatedly requested for the past 3 years. Personally, I would be afraid to build anything mission-critical upon it.

jhchen 9y ago
Quill is now a very popular project on Github, in the top 250 of all projects. A lot of people want to add their two cents to popular project and unfortunately the volume is far too high for a) me to respond to every single attempt at adding said cents and b) Github Issues's linear commenting UI makes all attempts at adding two cents confusing and cluttering. With this I prioritize the question that was asked, and specifically the concerns the OP raises. I have repeated many times that the removal of getHTML was because it was a passthrough function that added no additional value to Quill. You can look at the code history and the implementation of getHTML to confirm this fact. It has nothing to do with the desire to remove functionality as no functionality was removed. I'm confused why Delta is a bad name, since the word delta means change, variation or difference and that's seems to describe what it is: a change to Quill's content. Data source on the other hand is unspecific and even misleading. Naming is hard though and other readers can find out what Deltas are here https://quilljs.com/docs/delta/ https://quilljs.com/docs/delta/ and decide for themselves. Tables was reported as a feature request by me early in the project life because it is a known feature of Word but only years later did users indicated strong interest in it in Sept 2016. I believe in community contribution to open source so I decided to give the community a chance to build it so I wrote offered detailed implementation guidance: https://github.com/quilljs/quill/issues/117#issuecomment-244575777 https://github.com/quilljs/quill/issues/117#issuecomment-244.... The fact that this user had seemingly urgent need for it and was employed by a large public company with resources also contributed to this decision. Valuable exchanges were had in the Issue and multiple users has fully implemented it for their companies to varying levels of feature richness depending on their requirements. An official canonical implementation is coming in 2.0: https://medium.com/@jhchen/the-state-of-quill-and-2-0-fb38db7a59b9 https://medium.com/@jhchen/the-state-of-quill-and-2-0-fb38db....