Open Source, Collaborative Rich-Text, Web-Based Editor Almost Available 59
johanneswilm writes: Open source web-based editors such as CKEditor and TinyMCE have been available for more than a decade, and some closed source collaborative editors such as Google Docs have been available since 2007. Creating open source, collaborative, rich-text, web-based editors has proven difficult due to lack of standardization of the lower-level browser features. Now Marijn Haverbeke, the developer behind the popular CodeMirror has started such an editor, called Prosemirror, financed through a crowd-funding campaign. Meanwhile the W3C has installed a task force to rapidly standardize and fix the features needed in browsers to easily create richtext and semantic editors.
Re: (Score:1)
Is that a step up from cows?
Make up your mind... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Do we have to explain that "has started" means that he's working on it, "(a)lmost available" means it's not done yet, and that those two conditions are not mutually exclusive?
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Do we have to explain that "has started" means that he's working on it, "(a)lmost available" means it's not done yet, and that those two conditions are not mutually exclusive?
"Has started" means it just began, and "almost available" means that it is almost done, for most things, such as developing an "Open Source, Collaborative Rich-Text, Web-Based Editor Almost Available", those two are mutually exclusive.
Re: (Score:1)
If the whole thing takes a week to code, both can be true on Wednesday.
Exactly, although, i doubt it willl just take a week.
Re: (Score:2)
Except this is Thursday. Therefore it is a conspiracy.
Re: (Score:1)
"Has started" means it just began
Yes.
"almost available" means that it is almost done
Yes.
for most things, such as developing (a buzz-word rich software product), those two are mutually exclusive.
Steaming crock of shit. (How much software have _you_ actually developed? Nothing that's non-trivial gets done that quick.)
Re:Make up your mind... (Score:4, Funny)
Do we have to explain that "has started" means that he's working on it, "(a)lmost available" means it's not done yet, and that those two conditions are not mutually exclusive?
Well, to be honest I think a car analogy would help.
Owncloud already has a collaborative editor (Score:2)
FYI Owncloud Documents features collaborative editing [youtu.be]
Installed a task force? (Score:4, Funny)
> Meanwhile the W3C has installed a task force to rapidly ...
Whoa whoa... hold on there. What version of the task force did they install? It is compatible with the current W3C? (It runs on Linux, right?) Is the source for the task force available? Is it running in the cloud somewhere as a virtual task force?
Re: (Score:3)
You can read it all about in the new John Grisham - the W3C Editing Task Force
And an edgy, noire hero with different tattoos on his fists: <pain> and </pulse>.
Re: (Score:2)
If it was based on a Robert Ludlum novel, the movie would obviously be written as a Jason Bourne Shell Script.
Re: (Score:2)
Nicely done.
Re: (Score:1)
>yum install w3c-richtext-editing-support
Error: Package: w3c-richtext-editing-support-2015.8.27-1234.x86_64
Requires: a-degree-of-good-faith-consensus-that-doesnt-exist-plus-a-nonglacial-speed-of-development
Native binaries... (Score:3)
If they do a good job on the protocol, then it should be reasonably reasonable to make a native binary which also speaks the same protocol. That would be awesome too: you can collaborate via the web if you don't have it installed, but use a native program which doesn't hog resources like they're going out of style if you're using it a lot
Re: (Score:2)
http://prosemirror.net/demo_basic.html [prosemirror.net]
I like the collaborative part because that means it's OK to f O n t F iGh t!!!
Re: (Score:3)
A document standard should be independent of any one particular person's views on how an editor for it should be implemented. Any successful format should have proof of concept tools implemented through a variety of methods.
The data is the point, not the tool.
LibreOffice Online? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder, how will this editor compare to LibreOffice Online ("LOOL"), when it's finally released?
I assume the reviewer will be a mister Duke Nukem.
Re: (Score:2)
(Seriously though - unlike Duke Nukem, one can actually verify that LOOL is being actively developed. [github.com] I realize they've been talking about LOOL for like half a decade now without a real release, but I actually think they'll really release it now that they have some collaborators working on it.)
Etherpad lite is pretty close (Score:3)
I was able to spin up an instance of Etherpad Lite [etherpad.org] pretty easily. It's not very rich text, but does have programming language syntax highlighter and other plugins [etherpad.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It's different: WebODF uses ODF as a file format. You can see this by going clicking on the text and doing 'inspect element'. This will show you the actual ODF xml.
Demo:
http://www.vandenoever.info/bl... [vandenoever.info]
ShareLaTeX (Score:1)
ShareLaTeX is open source and LaTeX is better than any wysiwyg editor any day.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I know what you're trying to say, but LaTeX is a markup/macro language, not an editor :)
Apologies for very off-topic, but... (Score:2)
what I really want in this broad category is for Slack to support GitHub markdown.
Re: (Score:1)
Definitely off-topic, though.
Holding the code hostage? (Score:4, Insightful)
>> ProseMirror is intended to become open source (MIT licenced), but since I need to combine writing open software and earning a living, I am running a crowd-funding campaign to fund the work I put into the implementation. Until that succeeds, all rights are reserved.
In other words...this is the opposite of the type of open source projects we're used to, where someone writes something to "scratch an itch," releasing better and better versions into the open source community. Instead, this guy's said "hey, I'm building something cool, and I pinkie-promise swear to release it as open source, but only if you pay me $1M^H^H^H 35,000 Euro."
Re: (Score:2)
There are many projects that look similar on the surface, but aren't technically as sound as this project.
If you don't agree, then please provide counter-examples :)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not morally offended at his approach, but as a crowd-funding campaign, it does present a risk/reward ratio that I'm not willing to accept.
What would be more acceptable is if he firs developed the software and shows its worth, and then offered to open-source it for some specified amount of money. That eliminates almost all risk related the fact or quality of the delivery.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
And that is exactly what happened here. The software is mostly done (https://github.com/prosemirror/prosemirror), the author has a great track record of releasing and maintaining solid software, and there are demos on the project page (http://prosemirror.net).
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not morally offended at his approach, but as a crowd-funding campaign, it does present a risk/reward ratio that I'm not willing to accept.
What would be more acceptable is if he firs developed the software and shows its worth, and then offered to open-source it for some specified amount of money. That eliminates almost all risk related the fact or quality of the delivery.
In open source, the delivery is not the binary but the code itself. I've seen (and written) quite a few applications that run great, don't crash, wow the user, and have horrible code that I was _not_ proud of. I think that Open Office under Sun was a prime example of this. I understand that Photoshop code is a horror, a mess, and that nobody understands the full code base anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
If the software were to get open-sourced, then immediately everyone would have access to it (because you don't need to understand it in order to simply build it). And if it was worth maintaining, presumably OSS developers could make it more maintainable over time.
Re: (Score:1)
I think this is one good way of doing a kickstarter: creator take up the risk to create the thing, and backers ...). This solves the "never delivered" project problem of KS. Of course
pay only when it is done (almost
this is only applicable for product resulting from labor only (no physical parts).
The guy created the software, your are free to back him or not. He put his time and money to go that ... whose hostage ? He ask the community to share the cost of is labor and risk taking in exchange for a softwa
far
Re: (Score:2)
No hostage here !
Indeed. The original argument is like saying: my bakery is keeping my loaf of bread hostage until I pay for it.
Re: (Score:2)
You must be one of those executive types thinking all programmers should work for free.
Purpose? (Score:2)
What good is such an editor? The "online" part makes it seem unusable, unless it's a scam to get people to use cloud services. If I edit a document then I will always want it local.
Re: (Score:2)
Seems like the "Collaborative" part would be kinda difficult if it was not online.
Re: (Score:2)
But cloud hosted software is wonderful, provided the end user owns the service. Owncloud, Sandstorm.io, etc...
Re: (Score:2)