Bugfix/465 static cke field UI v3 #466
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
i-just
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
When the CKEditor field is rendered statically (when viewing a revision or when the editability condition is not met), we show the field’s raw HTML content and don’t instantiate CKEditor itself.
While this approach technically does what is expected and prevents the field from being editable, it can be a bit confusing when the field is empty, making it look like it wasn’t rendered. It also doesn’t show the content in a WYSIWYG way.
To improve this, I have switched the
Field::getStaticHtml()method to initialise the CKEditor, but in read-only mode.We could also hide the toolbar when in read-only mode, but I’m not sure if that’s beneficial. Keeping it in means that some features are still available. For example, you can still use the “find” part of the “Find and Replace” feature.
A separate PR was raised for v4: #467.
Related issues
#465