4 ms·
Noice! UX suggestion. You don't need the "as read only" save options if when you do a normal save the page tells you if it has been changed. That'll get you do
by nextts 2y ago
Noice!
UX suggestion. You don't need the "as read only" save options if when you do a normal save the page tells you if it has been changed. That'll get you down to 2 menu options and make me think less.
- zahlman 2y agoThe "as read only" options produce an HTML document that lacks the editor features - when you open that file from your computer, you'll see static content (although it just changes a couple of HTML attributes and leaves all the JavaScript in, inactive). The normal options re-create the entire page - editor, content and all.
- nextts 2y agoBut why is that useful? Just do what Confluence does. Read only, then click a pencil to edit.