Bitflux Editor
Document Actions
The overall look and feel of the Bitflux Editor was very simple and very easy to use and understand. The buttons at the top called to mind those short-cut buttons you see at the top of Open Office and MS Word, with very similar images and hover-over text. According to the documentation, Connexions could use our own buttons if we chose.
There are also a few parameters that give us a bit of flexibility; we can provide our own RelaxNG schema, XSL stylesheet, and CSS file. The only drawback here is that it seems to only take a single schema.
In particular, the Bitflux editor can insert figures easily, but I'm not exactly sure how it chooses the list of images available to insert. There wasn't an obvious way to add a title or caption text, but since you could insert ALT-text, I think it could be bent a bit to include that.
I tried to check out how they did tables, but that feature kept booting me out of the editor after asking how many rows/columns I wanted. Grr! I may check on a different system to see if it's a universal thing.
Bitflux looks like it might be easy to use for plain CNXML, but MathML and QML would just get thrown to the wind. We might be able to use it for plain MathML, but it would take a lot of maneuvering and a fair bit of jury-rigging.
Re: Bitflux Editor
Schema
Bitflux Editor - MS IE Support?
Reader's Digets Version: "MSIE 6 support is planned and it should be possible to port it."
<quote>
Why are other browsers not supported?
Why is Mozilla required? Is it because Mozilla is the only browser that supports the standards, or is it because Mozilla has proprietary features that you use?
Mozilla does indeed support the standards very well and we don't use proprietary features of Mozilla (no XUL, no XBL..), except where there are no standards (xslt-transformation within JS, for example).
Or is it just because you only do testing using Mozilla, and don't want to deal with browser compatability issues?
The main point why it's Mozilla only at the moment is because of the cross-plattform availability of Mozilla. One of our main sponsors uses a lot of Apple computers and on a Mac you don't have any other choice than Mozilla for doing something like that. MSIE/Mac 5.2 is very feature-limited compared to MSIE/Win 6 and Mozilla.
Another reason is indeed the amount of work needed to get it running on different browsers. Our resources are very limited right now. But as this is now an open source project now, we hope to get some support from other people and we welcome any contribution.
What about Netscape 6.x ? Or Opera? Or IE 6. These should be pretty close to the more recent W3C standards, right?
MSIE 6 support is planned and it should be possible to port it.
We had Netscape 6.2 support some time ago, but Netscape 6.2 was based on Mozilla 0.9.4 and it changed a lot since then. Mozilla was (and still is to some extend) a moving target concerning JS and DOM support, therefore we dumped support for Mozilla < 1.0 as this was just too much to take care of (especially between 0.9.9 and 1.0 were quite some changes). I think, it would be possible to backport it again, but since Netscape 7.0 is released, i don't know, if this is worth it. Netscape releases < 6.2 will never work, since they don't have xslt-support.
They same goes for other browsers (Opera, Konqueror). They may support the W3C standards very well, but they lack xslt-support on the client side. And this is very needed, otherwise we can't transform the incoming xml to something the editor can use. On the other hand, one could write something like an xsl-transformer in JavaScript, but this would be again a lot of work :)
</quote>
