Sonya*

A tangent discussion but one that's related.  
There's almost a philosophical discussion on what kind of service you're providing and how users engage or own their content. 
Are you offering a platform where users own their content? You may want to give them direct ability to delete.  
Are you offering a community, where members contribute to the commons? You should be much more selective about deletion, because deleting would disrupt the flow of conversation.  
Or is your website a mix of both, where they may "own" things like user blogs and user albums, but their forum discussion is part of the commons? 

Hi @LiamH,
How did you fix the issue? Might be a good idea to provide the resolution so if anyone searches for the same issue, they know how to tackle it.

Yes, there is a clear formatting button, but more importantly the content is stored according to a predefined schema - this means that there will never be random styles or lines that are unexpected, even after pasting. Though you cannot have "whatever wherever however in the source", this becomes a big advantage for everyday users since the entire content state is achievable through the UI.

I am out. I'll wait until I can test the editor integration on IPS5. Then I can say what I miss. Or I do not miss anything and am unlimited happy. Make me happy, IPS. This would be the best solution for both of us. 😉 

I understand that change does bring uncertainty, especially when people do not see the full picture or people jump to the wrong conclusion based on limited information. Sometimes, you just have to wait for a release and take things from there.
There are times when the edit post button isn't good enough, and I have to edit content via the source code to remove multiple breaks or styling issues due to copying and pasting embedded or other content.
However, I'm more inclined to wait to see how I get along with the new editor before I make an informed decision on what is and isn't needed.
 

For records in Pages.
Tables Removing tags, that I cannot remove or repair other ways, like <abbr>-tags Adding styles like ipsButton or ipsMessage

I am out. I'll wait until I can test the editor integration on IPS5. Then I can say what I miss. Or I do not miss anything and am unlimited happy. Make me happy, IPS. This would be the best solution for both of us. 😉 

AdminCP -> Appearance -> Icon & Logos

I think it's worth waiting until you can use it. Then get feedback from your members. I'm sure it actually works better than you imagine and that it's quite intuitive.
If you have a reason to use source code beyond fixing CKEditor issues, please let us know and please be as specific as you can which will really help, for example "Embed other sites" is less helpful than "I have a separate website, and I want to bring blog articles into my posts at around 600px high with a scrollbar".

I am out. I'll wait until I can test the editor integration on IPS5. Then I can say what I miss. Or I do not miss anything and am unlimited happy. Make me happy, IPS. This would be the best solution for both of us. 😉 

Conversation is going around in circles a bit now people. We're happy to hear the reasons people are using source mode in the first place, as it does give us opportunity to see things that may be easily solvable without people having to resort to such measures to achieve the same thing. However the back and forth debate between people on whether or not something is useful is a little futile. What is pointless to one, may not be pointless to another. There is a place for these discussions, and its probably not within a topic showing the new editor.
 

Best issues ever! 🙂 

It's really not, to be honest. Seriously, this weird "unmarked white space that exists but doesn't really unless you click it" idea is a nonsense - both in usability terms and in WYSIWYG standards. If your community members can't discern what a 'Title' field is, they're definitely not going to figure out whatever esoteric suggestion this is. 🙂
And I dare say that, if you know that your community mostly consists of people who are unable to operate forums, a small change to the post editor is really not going to move the needle for you one way or the other. I also don't know why you would decline to offer email support to people asking for help, but that is probably doing more harm to your cause than a blue arrow button ever could.
Agreed. It's a pretty bizarre argument; "these contextual buttons that add lines above and below a quote box are simply too complicated for the common user! What they really need is a Source button to click on so they can dig into the HTML code, scroll to the line they need on their tiny mobile screen and add extra p tags and div containers!" 😂

I'd argue that a large number of community owners/administrators know their user base, and have a pretty good idea of how new features and changes would be received. Most owners would be looking at this from a perspective of "how well will this do on my site?" and not "how good is this for me personally?"

We have an option not to index a page:

If you place a database on such page, it will be still added to the sitemap. At the same time all the records in the database have the meta tag “noindex”.
Google will mark the pages as excluded:

Desired behavior: do not add a database on the page that should not be indexed to the sitemap.php

What items? 
It is a bug, Jim. You are speaking of crawling efficiency all the time. In this case, you give search engines a suggestion to index something, that they should not index. It is not effective. It spends crawling quota for nothing. 😞

We have an option not to index a page:

If you place a database on such page, it will be still added to the sitemap. At the same time all the records in the database have the meta tag “noindex”.
Google will mark the pages as excluded:

Desired behavior: do not add a database on the page that should not be indexed to the sitemap.php

What items? 
It is a bug, Jim. You are speaking of crawling efficiency all the time. In this case, you give search engines a suggestion to index something, that they should not index. It is not effective. It spends crawling quota for nothing. 😞

Thank you!
If you would like an example on my live site. The database ID=14. It has 102 records that should not be crawled. New records are submitted daily. I do want to show the entries to the guests. But I do not want them to be indexed.
That's my dilemma. 
To avoid crawling waste, I will now remove the guest permission from page and database. It's a pity, as it's a nice feature that helps me to attract new users. 😞 

With v5, you can probably save a lot of hassle and just use the backticks to generate inline code. Either way, applications have a framework to add new editor functionality, including buttons.
  CleanShot 2024-05-21 at 10.29.11.mp4  
 

Being able to use full HTML and CSS for styling articles in Pages, at least for the admin, is one of the main criteria I used when I elected to switch to Invision Community to build my website, so if that's no longer available, that will be a HUGE step backwards, no matter how you slice it.
I understand that I'll have to play with the new editor to see how things are handled, but perhaps you can already answer a couple of questions: 
Is there a way to create HTML anchor links?  Will it be possible to create custom HTML buttons the way I currently can, for example like this?

What items? 
It is a bug, Jim. You are speaking of crawling efficiency all the time. In this case, you give search engines a suggestion to index something, that they should not index. It is not effective. It spends crawling quota for nothing. 😞

We have an option not to index a page:

If you place a database on such page, it will be still added to the sitemap. At the same time all the records in the database have the meta tag “noindex”.
Google will mark the pages as excluded:

Desired behavior: do not add a database on the page that should not be indexed to the sitemap.php

What items? 
It is a bug, Jim. You are speaking of crawling efficiency all the time. In this case, you give search engines a suggestion to index something, that they should not index. It is not effective. It spends crawling quota for nothing. 😞

I've added this as a bug report for you. As Jim said, technically its working as written at present. However it does make little sense I agree