Forum OpenACS Development: Re: Current recommended Richtext editors?
that ckeditor4 looks very nice. Can you explain why it needs a separate package? I take it that replacing Xinha is not so simple as just dropping in the replacement editor?
(a) was a problem, since there were 3 different interfaces depending on the editor; OpenACS 5.9.0 has a pluggable interface, needs no special master-template integrations and is more extensible without hacking in the core.
(b) is/was a problem with debian bundling of acs-core, since debian prohibits among many other issues minified files. By throwing the editors out of core, many of the issues are gone, and the rich-text editors can be obtained e.g. via "install from repository".
Yes, there is no standard integration of rich-text editors in general, every rich-text editor has a slightly different interface (using css classes, IDs, etc.), supporting different modes (inline editing) and or plugins (e.g. image selectors, etc). Having these in separate packages makes the setup more flexible and it can be more easily tailored by custom installations (who have the need to use different editor versions, etc.).
Its output is HTML code so to save as plain text perhaps a good idea would be use markdown