HTML Editor in standard better than advanced version?

[lstroud]

This may be a dumb question, but why is the html editor in the standard version so much more complete/nicer than the one in the advanced version?

I don't mean to be insulting, but it seems like the advanced version is less complete and less polished. Is it new? Don't get me wrong advanced is better in nearly every other way.

The only feature that standard seems to be missing is inlining images that you attach (and are not available on a web server). Advanced does this, but unintuitively (via attachments, not an image button) and it seems a bit fragile.

LES

[mmorse]

Originally Posted by lstroud

This may be a dumb question, but why is the html editor in the standard version so much more complete/nicer than the one in the advanced version?

I don't mean to be insulting, but it seems like the advanced version is less complete and less polished. Is it new? Don't get me wrong advanced is better in nearly every other way.

We've only recently inserted a WYSWYG editor into the lite/standard (HTML) web-client: /blog/archives/2007/11/50_coolness_part_2.html
Infact it's the YUI editor: Yahoo! UI Library: Rich Text Editor

We will continue to expand the advanced (AJAX) web-client editor - in 5.0.6 for example we've added better link editing:

Originally Posted by lstroud

The only feature that standard seems to be missing is inlining images that you attach (and are not available on a web server). Advanced does this, but unintuitively (via attachments, not an image button) and it seems a bit fragile.
LES

Vote for / support ticket tag / cc watch this RFE: Bug 21963 - HTML Client: Inline image attachment feature in "add attachment" page

[lstroud]

you said "in 5.0.6 for example we've added better link editing". I haven't found any link creation or editing in the 5.0.5 ajax client. Was that just a syntax error?

[mmorse]

Nope - type 5.0.6 correctly - we obviously have to run our new versions ahead of time
We even do it on our production enviroment - the concept is called dogfooding: http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Eat_one's_own_dog_food

[mmorse]

You can even grab the source from our perforce cache if you'd like to check out what's in 5.0.6 FOSS so far
Building Zimbra using Perforce - Zimbra :: Wiki

[lstroud]

Thanx. I'll check it out.

I wasn't referring to the version number. I was referring to the fact that you said you had better link support in 5.0.6. I was saying that I saw none in 5.0.5. I suppose that qualifies as better, but I was wondering if I was just outright overlooking something in 5.0.5.

BTW, I appreciate the eat the own dog food approach. As a developer, I don't think we do it enough.

While, I've got you...I've had a lot of trouble with images displaying correctly (or at all - terribly inconsistent) in html emails (advanced client). Is this something you have seen? If so, do you know if 5.0.6 is taking care of that?

Thanx, LES

[mmorse]

If it's the entire email not showing in HTML (appeared in 5.0.5) fixed for 5.0.6:
Bug 27033 - HTML mails render as plain text intermittently > Bug 26432 - When Searching, first result is always displayed as text and not rich text

If you're talking about just embedded images but the rest of the HTML displays properly-
Fixed in 5.0.6: Bug 27081 - Embedded images are delivered broken > Bug 27118 - Inline attachments render only 50% of the time > Bug 23442 - Photos not showing up in body of email
> Bug 21959 - Inline image attachment not showing correctly

Open about inline embedded images-
Against 5.0.5: Bug 27904 - inline image problem with Firefox & Bug 27310 - inline attachments: Can attach only one image as inline at a time
Against 5.0.3: Bug 26497 - FF2.0: Images in message body not shown
Against 5.0.1: Bug 24030 - inline image attachments are having 2 src attributes
Against 4.5.5: Bug 18423 - inline images in mail messages do not display
(Most probably need to be marked dupes/cleaned up)

I would shy towards holding of till 5.0.6 GA on opening another 'inline images won't display' bug unless you grab current source from the FRANKLIN branch and test; else it's kinda too many possibilities to account for right now to find the cause.
Go ahead and fill us in on the bug you're seeing though, and I can check if it appears resolved. Of course, certainly open one right away after 5.0.6 comes out if whatever situation your encountering is reproducible.

[lstroud]

I think that what I am seeing correlates to the bugs that you mentioned above. My understanding is that 5.0.6 is close to dropping. So, I'll pull the code and give it a shot. Hopefully it resolves most of the issues. If not, I'll file some bugs and let you know.

Thank you for the help.
LES