Under Community Review

This is Under Community Review to solicit feedback and use cases.

Would it be sufficient to have a system-wide settings that allow to configure what options are set by default when new RTF field is added?

How many presents are expected for one setup? How many schemas will use them?

RTF Configuration Presets

When creating schemas, we have the option to set a text field as rich text, and to also determine exactly what editing features are available to that rich text field. This is great, but when I am creating many new schemas with similar fields that have the same editing features, it becomes burdensome to constantly uncheck all -> select features.

It would be nice if there were presets that we could create for RTF fields. For example, I'd like to have a "poor text" preset where the only editing controls were links and special characters. And maybe a "middle-class text" where I can allow links, special characters, and also  lists, bold, underlined, and super/sup script.

This saves the added complexity of creating an embedded schema with these editorial restrictions and inserting it into my content schemas.

frank taylor
Parents

  • A long time ago I submitted an idea to have the RTF XSLT able to use xslt:include (or was it import?). The general idea was to have centrally managed settings that would apply to multiple RTFs. In retrospect that was far too technical an idea, and no wonder it didn't fly. This is much better as it focuses on the functional needs and leaves the technical details to R&D.

Comment

  • A long time ago I submitted an idea to have the RTF XSLT able to use xslt:include (or was it import?). The general idea was to have centrally managed settings that would apply to multiple RTFs. In retrospect that was far too technical an idea, and no wonder it didn't fly. This is much better as it focuses on the functional needs and leaves the technical details to R&D.

Children
No Data