Ben Langhinrichs

Photograph of Ben Langhinrichs

E-mail address - Ben Langhinrichs







Recent posts

Tue 18 Feb 2020

Branching out: Would it run on a toaster?



Tue 18 Feb 2020

Branching out: Models, msgs, and microservices



Thu 13 Feb 2020

We added that to Midas... in 1999


February, 2020
SMTWTFS
      01
02 03 04 05 06 07 08
09 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Search the weblog





























Genii Weblog

Grumble grumble web grumble coexistence grumble

Wed 17 Nov 2010, 09:48 AM



by Ben Langhinrichs
I will have a more explicit version, but look at the toolbar from the CKEditor as used in the 8.5.2 Discussion database, or at least those that are strictly text related.  These 8 buttons/inputs are generally grouped as the 5 settings I show below.


Toolbar with text attributes and settings


Of those 5 settings, Font Face, Point Size, Attributes, Text Color and Background Color, how many do you think work consistently and properly when the document is created on the web and then viewed in Notes (not even edited, just viewed)? Which of the 5 do and which don't. Remember now, these are the first 8 items on the toolbar that people will see.

The answer is 2 out of 5. The 3 which do not work properly:

Font Face:  (usually converts to Default Serif, sometimes Default Sans Serif, no matter what font is chosen).

Point Size: virtually always wrong, presumably because it mistakenly assumes pixel size rather than point size, although the specified sizes are clearly point sizes. Thus, 8pt becomes 7pt, 10pt becomes 8pt, and so on.

Background Color: since the background color is not supported in Notes, this setting is ignored.  Causes a real problem when a light text color is paired with a dark background, as the light text color may be invisible in Notes.

A CoexEdit user wrote and asked whether CoexEdit helps.  The answer is that CoexEdit used without any design changes to the database but with AutoRecognizeDiscussion turned on will fix both the Font Face and the Point Size, and will map certain background colors to highlights.

Copyright 2010 Genii Software Ltd.

What has been said:


909.1. Henning Heinz
(17.11.2010 15:22)

I assume that from IBM's point of view you should only use XPages.


909.2. Ben Langhinrichs
(11/17/2010 03:25 PM)

Presumably that is the attitude, but they might want to stop calling it the "Discussion - Notes & Web" template first, and then stop touting it as a solution which works for both.


909.3. David Leedy
(11/17/2010 03:58 PM)

Not that this is a GREAT answer... but the discussion DB does run as XPages in the Notes client doesn't it?


909.4. Ben Langhinrichs
(11/17/2010 04:11 PM)

@David - In theory, yes, but I don't know how you actually make it happen. That would be a good solution, except of course that you lose all the capability of the Notes client editing, which is much more robust than the web editor anyway. Still, it would make them compatible.


909.5. Stephan H. Wissel
(11/18/2010 02:06 AM)

@Ben: You only need to go to the startup properties of the discussion database. Here you will see "Frameset" for the Notes client and "XPage" for web. Set the Notes client to "XPage" too and it will launch in the Notes client.


909.6. Ian Randall
(18/11/2010 02:44 AM)

While you are on this topic, try this out:

1) Populate a table containing a reasonable mix of rich-text attributes using the Notes Client.

2) Open it in the Web browser and edit something, then save the document.

3) Finally try editing this rich-text field again in the Notes Client and see what happens.

Sure the very basic rich-text attributes like bold and underline seem to survive a round-trip, but anything beyond that becomes a real mess.