News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Wysiwtfftwomg.

Re:Wysiwtfftwomg by guynamedloren on Sunday October 20, 2013 @06:29PM (#6581821)
This was a bit difficult to follow, but if it says what I think it says, markdown is a step in the right direction for device-agnostic content. With markdown, the content creator is not responsible for design and layout - this is handled independently by a designer, or several designers, with different designs for different outputs (desktop, mobile, pdf, ePub, etc). One major upside to markdown is that it can be written in any text editor on any device - from desktop software (notepad) to forms in a browser. Another upside is uniformity - with multiple writers collaborating on content, or if a specific style should be followed, there's little to no possibility for deviation - just write some '##' for headers and '-' for lists and the output always looks uniform.

The problem is that there is a learning curve to markdown, and while it's a small learning curve, it's still a hurdle. Toolbars and pseudo-WYSIWYG editors that output markdown are good baby steps. Fortunately, it's becoming more commonplace and picking up steam outside of developers with integration on sites like Reddit.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Wysiwtfftwomg by bambax on Monday October 21, 2013 @04:02AM (#6584036)
At many companies that I've worked with, content creators (authors) write in Word, and then content managers/editors copy-paste from Word into a CMS, losing part or all of the formatting in the process.

I once developed a specific transformation engine to convert Word documents to a given schema -- if they respect a set of rules that the transformation engine enforces.

Authors will always want to use Word; what would be interesting would be a generic tool to avoid the copy-and-paste step, but the "genericity" part is very hard...

Short of this, I built a small utility that converts rich text to Markdown: http://markitdown.medusis.com

It can be used to copy-paste from Word (or any rich text) and retains all formatting that core Markdown supports; it runs in the browser, locally (no roundtrip to any server) so no one should be able to see the content you use it for.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Wysiwtfftwomg by ams6110 on Sunday October 20, 2013 @07:45PM (#6582117)
There is really no more difficulty in learning Markdown than there is difficulty in learning how to avoid all the baffling, un-undo-able ways that most rich text boxes can completely stuff up the formatting of your content, to the point where you simply have to wipe it all out and start over.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Wysiwtfftwomg by andrewflnr on Sunday October 20, 2013 @10:08PM (#6582775)
Objectively, Markdown isn't hard to learn, but people don't really want to learn anything, they just want to look for the button. Discoverability is, for most people, an important advantage of GUIs over most interpretation-of-freeform-text interfaces (like command lines and programming or formatting languages).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Wysiwtfftwomg by johnjlocke on Monday October 21, 2013 @12:40AM (#6583367)
Markdown isn't difficult for us; it is a very real hurdle for those who are left in charge of content management.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Wysiwtfftwomg by dools on Monday October 21, 2013 @05:33AM (#6584377)
I really don't think that markdown solves the wysiwyg problem. People need to be able to see precisely how the content will appear on the page as they enter it and in a way that they can't possible break, because if they can, they will. Check out our demo here and tell me whay you think: http://www.decalcms.com/tour/
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Wysiwtfftwomg by drcongo on Monday October 21, 2013 @09:29AM (#6585325)
You should post that link a few more times in case anyone else has missed it in previous replies.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Wysiwtfftwomg by guynamedloren on Monday October 21, 2013 @06:04AM (#6584468)
Looks cool, but what about being device agnostic?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Wysiwtfftwomg by dools on Monday October 21, 2013 @07:30AM (#6584740)
Do you mean in terms of the editing interface, or the content that's produced? Editing on mobile devices is something to address in the (far distant :) future but we want to get it right on modern browsers first. If you put your email in at the end of the initial tour you get a more detailed demo that only works in Firefox, but shows you in a lot more detail how it all works. Our goal at the moment is to build support to launch a crowdfunding campaign to finish it off ... although we could theoretically finish it off with our own funding, we don't want to keep toiling away in obscurity so getting "backers" is basically like getting "validation" right now.

The goal would be: release just the basic functionality we have now with key improvements to deployment and obviously making it work in all modern browsers, then iterate from there according to customer demand with features (including things like editing from tablets and mobile devices) being prioritised by engaging with our user base.

Basically we've just spent too long working on this with absolutely no engagement with our target market (designers/devs) so we want to get it out in the open and see if it's actually worth finishing.

EDIT: If what you're referring to is the content being produced, then the fact that the markup and editing experience is so highly structured and the fact that the user is unable to put any presentation logic (fonts/sizes/styles etc.) arbitrarily in with the content unless you, as the designer, have explicitly allowed them to do it, the format is so reliable that repurposing the content to different devices is very safe and reliable -- ie. it doesn't really matter that the content editor can't preview on multiple devices, because you know that whatever they enter in, the format will be so predictable you can make it look good on any device.

[ Parent | on HN ]