Building PHP WYSIWYG Editor - php

I am building a web application in which the user may add a page, edit the layout, drag drop element, resize element, format the text, edit the element attribute etc.
In the page the user may include (retrieve) dynamic data, like maybe data from database, data generated by php code, etc.
I have played around with cakephp and jquery lately and tried to build this app. But I stumbled upon on how to appropriately display the php code. I tried to look into the cakephp core code and find about output buffering and tried to utilize output buffering to parse the php code and use regex to display it but it is more likely to reinvent the wheel if I write the parser my self
What I am asking is:
Ok, to be more simple and specific I just want to ask, how to save and load the page that was created by the user especially if the page contains php code. I just want to know is there any other method than write my own parser or maybe a library to parse a php code?
Ok that's all for now, does anyone have any idea how to implement it? Or maybe any page / website that could be useful to take some reference from? Maybe a sample code from which I can take some reference
Thanks

I'm not sure you'll find any good answer here about that.
Whoa I don't know where to start. I'll start by the number 3. You want widgets. Then that means you have to create widget class or objects that possesses a template or something that makes them drawable "well, kinda". If I were you it would be loaded from javascript and not really from php. Each widget would be in some way individual applications loaded in a div using javascript.
Point 2, You wanted widgets. When you add widgets to your page, you have to save some informations, like Position, Title, dimensions and so on. You may even save creation parameters. For exemple a ListWidget may be started with different ItemProvider. That way you don't have to write 1000 widgets but only one that shows different content. That said you have widgets, dimension and position. Now that lead us to point 1.
Point 1. Once you have your widgets, position and dimensions, you send the data you used to create them associated with the page to the server. That lead us two point 2 again.
Once you have saved a page. You can see it by retrieving all widgets with parameters and so on. That leaves you 2 options.
Generate Javascript that will recreate the saved widgets.
Generate Html will all the widgets.
Option 1 is simpler since option 2 won't bind html to javascript by itself. Solution 2 on the other hand is better since there is only 1 request to the server.
Oh and a last thing, You should set yourself some limits. That kind of thing can get very complicated and unfortunately not that great. See drupal for example. It does lots of cool stuff but as soon as you install lots of module. Drupal transform itself in some sort of memory eating monster. And almost all the time you don't really need that much of dynamic content. Fixed layouts will do work nice almost 99% of the time.
I'm also forced to say that but if you try to create an application that give users as much power as a scientist that could raise a 7 legged cat. I think you're going to play with really obscure forces!

Related

Is there any canvas/layout editor in Javascript or PHP for defining custom document layouts?

I'm trying to develop a invoice printing module for the application we're creating (in PHP & Javascript). The thing is... I want our clients to be able to customise their invoice output as in being able to choose where to put their logo and header, how to organize their data output, etc.
I know how I want to do it, but what I don't know is how to put it into practice, so my question is: is there any Javascript or PHP class/module providing an editable canvas/layout? (so I can allow my customers to custom design their documents or reports).
Something being able to handle <div></div> blocks in a graphical way, similar to what tag editors do, returning a serialized array or something like that... well, anything would actually do, as long as I'm able to integrate it in our codebase, but that's the question...
I couldn't find anything like what you are looking for but it shouldn't be too hard to create one.
I wouldn't go for a canvas based solution but rather on an absolutely positioned DIVs with drag and drop functionality and inline content editing.
You can easily serialize the content and position of the DIVs using Ajax.
The tutorial here is not what you are lookign for but it's the first step in the way: http://devheart.org/articles/jquery-customizable-layout-using-drag-and-drop/
update
Obviously this: http://jqueryui.com/demos/draggable/ is also an important reference

Argument for PHP vs. DWT

I was having a "discussion" with my manager today about the merits of using PHP includes and functions as a template to build websites more quickly and efficiently. He has been using Dreamweaver templates for years and sees it as really the best way to go. I would like to start using some different and more efficient methods for web creation, because we need to get through our projects faster. I would like to know in detail what would make Dreamweaver dwts better than using code to accomplish the same task, or vice versa.
His reasoning is:
When you change links on the dwt file, it changes links for every page made from that dwt.
Even if you move pages around in directories, it maintains links to images
Everyone in the company should do it one way, and this is the way he chose (there are two of us, with someone who's just started who needs to learn web design from the beginning, and he plans to teacher her the dwt method)
If you edit a site made with a dwt, you can't change anything in the template (it's grayed out), making it safer
If he's building sites with dwt, and I'm doing it with PHP includes, we can't edit each others' sites. It gets all over the place. When we have new employees in the future, it will get all crazy and people can't make changes to others' sites if they're out of the office.
I've been studying PHP these days, and am thrilled with how powerful it is for creating dynamic pages. The site in question which sparked this "discussion" is more or less static, so a dwt would work fine. However, I wanted to stretch my wings a bit, and the code was getting REALLY jumbled as the pages grew. So I chopped off the header, footer, and sidebar, and brought them in to all the pages with a php include, as well as dynamically assigned the title, meta data, and description for each page using variables echoed in the header.The reasons I like this better are:
It's cleaner. If every page contains all the data for the header and footer, as well as the extra tags Dreamweaver throws in there, then I have to sift through everything to find where I need to be.
It's safer. It's sort of like the above reason dwts are safe, except I do all my code editing in a text editor like Coda. So on occasion I have accidentally deleted a dwt-protected line of code because those rules only apply within dreamweaver. I can't chop off part of the header if I can't see it. Incidentally, this makes it easier to identify bugs.
It's modern. I look through source when I see great pages made by designers and design firms I admire. I've never seen dwt tags. I believe by using PHP to dynamically grab files and perform other tasks that keeps me from having to go through and change something on every page, life becomes easier, and keeps things streamlined and up-to-date with current web trends and standards.
It's simple. This should be at the top of the list. Like I said we have to train a new person in how to create for the web. Isn't it much better for her to learn a simple line of PHP and get an understanding for how the language works, rather than learn an entire piece of (not exactly user-friendly) software just for the purpose of keeping her work the exact same as everyone else's? On that note, I believe PHP is a powerful tool in a web designer's arsenal, and it would be a sin to prevent her from learning it for the sake of uniformity.
It's fast. Am I mistaken in my thought that a page build with header and footer includes loads faster than one big page with everything in it? Or does that just apply when the body is loaded dynamically with AJAX?
I did extensive searching on Google and Stack Overflow on this topic and this is the most relevant article I could find:
Why would one use Dreamweaver Templates over PHP or Javascript for templating?
The answer is helpful, but I would really like to understand in more detail why exactly we shouldn't switch to a new method if it's simpler and has more potential. My manager insists that "the result is the same, so if there isn't something that makes me say, 'oh wow that's amazing and much better!', then we should just stay how we are now."
(I do apologize for the length of this question, but the guidelines asked that I be as specific as possible.)
Like I said in comments, without knowing what exactly sites you are working with it's hard to tell which PHP features are most important to showcase. However, I can try and describe the most simple kind of sites I was dealing with, and where and how PHP came in handy. If you work with something more complicated, the need of programming language may only increase.
The simple website may have a few different pages with text and images. I'm assuming nothing interactive (i.e. no inquiry form), no large amount of structured data (i.e. no product catalog), only one design template which is used by every page with no differences whatsoever. Here's the typical structure:
One PHP file (index.php) for handling all sorts of php-ish stuff
One design file (template.php for example) for storing everything html-ish (including header, footer and more. Basically all html with placeholders for text and menu)
One CSS file for, well, the site CSS
Most of the texts are stored in database or (worst case) just txt files. Menu (navigation) is stored in database as well
Images folder with all the needed images
The key features here are:
Simplicity. You only have as many files and code as you really need to keep things organized and clear
Reusability. You can basically copy/paste your php code with little to no changes for a new similar website
No duplicates whatsoever.
Data and design separation. Wanna change texts, fix typos? You do it without as much as touching design (html) files. Wanna make a completely brand new design for your website? You can do it without even knowing what those texts are or where they are kept.
like deceze said, no lock-ins. Use whatever software you like. (Including Dreamweaver)
PHP is responsible for taking texts, menus, design and rendering them all into a web page. If website is in more than 1 language, PHP code choose the right texts for the language of visitors choice.
If texts are stored in database, you don't even need notepad and ftp. You just need, i.e., phpMyAdmin (stored in server) so you can connect directly to database and edit any text you like using only web browser; from anywhere in the world. (I am assuming no real CMS). If you need to add one more page, you connect to database using myAdmin and browser, enter the page name (for menu) in 1 or more languages, enter the text for new page (in 1 or more languages), done! new page created, name placed in the menu, all hyperlinks generated for you. If you need to remove a page, you connect to database and click delete. If you need to hide a page for a while (i.e. for proof reading before publishing), you connect to database and uncheck "published" box.
All this doesn't come with just using database ofcourse, you need to program these features with PHP. It may take about 1 - 3 hours depending on experience and the code is fully reusable for every similar website in the future. Basically you just copy/paste php file, copy/paste database tables, enter new text and menu into database, put placeholders into your html file and done! brand new site created.
Which immediately makes most of the reasoning for DWT irrelevant. You don't move files around because you have only one html file and no directories, you don't need grayed out template because texts/images (content) and template are not even in the same file, there's no such thing as changing links in dwt file because it's PHP that generates them on the fly (these are not real links to real html files but rather links with parameters to tell PHP which exactly page must be rendered.. because remember we have just 1 file). The bottom line is, comparing features of the two side by side is like comparing features of a sword vs machinegun. Sharpness and length of the blade concepts are meaningless in a case of machinegun; while lifetime sword user won't really get the meaning of velocity and caliber before he tries and uses machinegun. And yet, while you can't compare their features one by one, no one brings sword to a gunfight for a reason :)
As for #3, currently there are many more people working with PHP than DWT (in a case you will need more employees in the future, or if other people will need to work with your websites later, etc.) As for #5, you can edit PHP websites with Dreamweaver as fine as DWT websites.
That's just off the top of my head. I wrote this in my lunch break so I likely forgot or missed quite a few things. I hope you will get a proper answer with detailed DWT vs PHP comparison too.
You simply can't compare PHP vs. DWT.
PHP is a programming language, where templating is just one of it's numerous features, and DWT is just a silly proprietary system to build simple web pages.
there is actually nothing to compare.
I would say that using DWT templates over PHP do have some advantages.
It does not need any extra server-side process, like PHP to process the files at the server.
You can serve all files to the user as .html files rather than .php files, though I suspect that it is possible to hide the .php extension. Why should any user see anything other than .html?
You don't have to learn PHP syntax/programming. It is true that you can do more with PHP that plain .dwt files but for plain templating the .dwt files can be just as clean.
It is not true that .dwt files are a lock-in technology. The feature is also implemented by other web editors, e.g. Microsoft Expression Web.

How does one structure a CMS?

So I am making a CMS, a gallery script via Object Oriented PHP. Anyways, the problem is now that I have the basic layout for the objects and such to the point where I need to start putting together, I am stumped how to do this.
What I have is essentially a Navigation, Data, Gallery, and Module class. Module stands for pages, categories, et cetera. The problem is that Gallery outputs the images, module gives the data for the pages, navigation creates the (you guess it) navigation. You get the picture.
On the index page, I end up doing essentially this (this WILL change, but it is illustrative for how I was starting to set it up):
$navigation = new Navigation();
$navigation->top();
$page = new Module();
$page->basicPage($_GET['m']);
The basicPage() does a few things, but primarily this is the issue:
$gallery = new Gallery();
$gallery->setGallery($id);
$gallery->thumbGallery();
So on so forth.
The problem arises in that if I call basicPage(), the designer or whoever has very little control over the choices. As you saw, it is thumbGallery, and that doesn't allow full images, and it doesn't even let you set the size of the thumbnails (which I do let them do, only if they can call that function them self though).
So I thought of a few solutions to the problem. I don't have these basic pages, but I have the designers build out templates much like wordpress. I dislike this solution, because it makes the design process complicated, albeit thorough. I don't want to make it so that everything is controlled, and is one way. Of course you can "display: none" to elements as the designer and a few other tricks, but I want them to have the ability to do a lot of things, without the complicated way that Wordpress does it.
My question is how do I strike the balance between simple and flexibility?
Any help, even ideas are appreciated. Thanks.
EDIT: I forgot to mention. The problem is from just having the index have all of this data is otherwise I will have to do a lot of if/else and such, and I really didn't want to make this a procedural program, just one you can essentially just plop stuff down and we're good. See, module stands for both gallery and page. Most pages will not have images attached to it, and the categories will have images, but not always text. It will cause an error if I call thumbGallery and it is just an informational page, and if I call an informational page and it is a category, it will not show the images (to avoid the error). I could, and have started to build it together in what is called basic page,but the problem like I noted before is that it restricts how much freedom the designer has without having to mess with php, and most designers are pretty dumb when it comes to php, unfortunately. Espectially OOP (no offense. I am a designer too, but I happen too program).
Without seeing the rest of your code it's difficult to know the best solution considering what you already have. I've developed my own custom CMS Application Frameworks from scratch for the past 9 years, and I'd be glad to give you some tips.
I'm assuming you're storing all the CMS content in a database. Storing the configuration for the gallery settings in the database might be a possible solution. In theory you should have different views (following the MVC pattern) for displaying the gallery in different ways. A listing view for showing multiple image thumbnails, one for showing a single image, plus a view to list categories perhaps.
So, in the database you could define that page X should show the thumbnail view instead of a category view.
Not sure if that's a solution to the problem you have, but that's a very simplistic example of how I've done it in my CMS's in the past.

A client wants me to do CSS coding (only) but doesn't want to provide me the php files

I have a client who wants me to do CSS coding only, but doesn't want to give me the php files.
Right now, I just have access to the live website (with no CSS).
It is entirely made with tables and I want to use divs instead
I'm not sure if it is possible to do the coding
I thought about copying and pasting the generated HTML code from each page
Will this cause possible problems with the end result?
Yes, this will cause huge problems: you'll do an awesome job, client will have trouble integrating it with their site, client will abandon your awesome work.
IMO, you should let the client know that you'll do the best you can with what they have given you, but you would be able to save them a lot of work and do a better job if you could have access to the source code.
If you know that you can't make the client happy with what they have given you, though, it would be doing everyone a disservice for you to try.
If you absolutely can't convince them to give you access to the source, then this client sounds stupid:
He has a layout which is table based.
He wants you to magically make it look better with CSS, without having access to the source.
"#Phoenix I don't see any classes or IDs." - there are no classes or ids to hook into.
You might be able to do it if you used some CSS3 selectors to, for example, select the 3rd td inside a td inside the 2nd table to apply styles to ;)
But, that won't help if you have to support older browsers, which makes this impossible at the moment without doing something differently.
I don't have full knowledge of your situation, but here's what I would probably do (if I couldn't convince them to give me access to the source):
Open the live site.
Copy the HTML source code.
Paste it into a new local file.
Add this into the <head> section: <base href="http://the-clients-site.com/" />.
This will let all the assets on the page load from the client's actual site.
Now, you have something to work with.
You have to keep track of ALL changes you make to the file.
The first change should be adding your own blank style tag.
Then, you can add id and class to whichever elements you feel need it.
You should try to avoid moving around elements, unless it's absolutely required. Those changes are a whole lot harder to explain to someone. I know from experience.
You should be able to style the page properly now.
Then, you deliver the completed page, and the documented list of changes you had to make to the HTML (add id, here add class there).
The client should then be able to integrate the changes into his site.
Well, at a bare minimum they'll need to modify ther PHP to reference your CSS. More importantly, you need to be able to hook your CS up to elements - Do tables/rows/etc. have Ids or classes attached?
If they are clever and have some good separation between code and presentation (using a templating engine or similar) then you can probably just edit the template / css.
If they won't let you edit the PHP and you come up with a new awesome layout, they will have a nightmare job trying to integrate it and probably won't bother.
I don't see the problem. You can style tables just as easily as divs. You don't have to know how the wall is built to know how to paint it, which is pretty much all you've been hired to do. Only problem I could see would be if they haven't added any classes or ids to the elements yet. After all, what the browser/client sees is the only thing that needs styling, and since you can see everything that the browser sees, you can see everything that needs styling.
If they have added classes/ids, then just take a copy of a page and style it in a testing area, and then once it looks nice, you take a copy of another page and make sure it looks nice with it too, add to the CSS if there are any new unstyled elements that didn't exist on the first page, once it looks nice, then move on to another page, and another repeating the process until you are satisfied that it appears that every page within reason would look nice with it.
If they haven't added classes/ids, tell them they need to in some capacity before you can work on it, perhaps provide some guidance on the issue.
I'm actually doing this right now for SO.
I'm working on a userscript that provides an alternate "clean" stylesheet for the StackExchange network. I have no access to the SO engine. I am using the Chrome Inspector to look at how the elements are set up. I recommend the same. (Although it is a little different, since I'm modifying the original CSS file.)
You can easily identify what you want to style with the Inspector and then work from there. I would suggest that you ask your client for a list of classes and IDs though. (I got that in the form of an existing stylesheet, you can go about it in a different way, if that suits you and your client.)

Very basic HTML/scripting/active page question

A friend has asked me for help with her website design. Although I know a fair amount about the basics behind HTML, XML, Php, ASP.Net, javascript, etc., I'm not really comfortable sitting down and coding from scratch. All of the work I do is in Java, C++, and so on.
My friend would like to add a vertically scrolling marquee to her site - no problem, there is code for that all over the internet. Here is the tricky part - she would like the text to be dynamically pulled from another website. This isn't like a simple text file, either - it's a list of names from a specific blog post, so there would be a lot of text processing involved to wade through all of the other markup, and extract the relevant info.
The way I see it, here are her options -
1) Write some kind of a perl script or somesuch that is set to run daily. This script will visit the blog and extract the necessary info. It will then update the HTML file's marquee text with its new info.
2) Some sort of active page written in ASP or PHP that will dynamically build the marquee (and the rest of the site) each time the site is visited, basically doing the work of the perl script each time. This seems like it has the potential to be somewhat slow.
Per my understanding, those are her only options. Am I correct? There is no simply way to do this in javascript that I am just missing? I know you can reference an image to be dynamically pulled with the marquee, but this isn't that simple...
Thanks.
EDIT: I guess where I was going with my question was this: Unless I implement this statically, this is going to be fairly involved, right? I believe it is over my head. This is why I would like to simply copy/paste the text list into the html document. It would need to be updated every time the blog does, but that only appears to happen every few months, so that's not a large chore. I realize this is a lazy solution, but this is from someone very inexperienced in web development.
For reference, this is the SPECIFIC blog post which the text will come from, and my friend would ONLY like to display that list of names that begins when you scroll several paragraphs down.
http://truthnottasers.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-follows-are-names-where-known.html
It depends what the list of names looks like, i.e. how much intelligence is needed to parse it. But this could be something that could be fairly easily be pulled, parsed and displayed using Ajax, for example in the jquery flavour.
All the blogs I have ever seen have an RSS feed. Why not just grab the feed?... Google provides javascript that does only this.
Google Ajax Feed API
The RSS suggestion sounds good. If you can't get it in the RSS you could screen scrape the content.
If you could do it with Javascript I think it would suffer the same resource issues as your once a day Perl script and every load asp/php methods since it would still have to fetch the web content by making a call to the web site.
Another option is to use asp.net and enable caching so that when other visitors come to the site instead of getting the page all over again it serves up the cached page. You can set this to cache for 24 hours or so. I'm sure other server languages have similar features. Basically this would be the same as your once a day Perl method but keep it within a web framework.
Another hacky solution would be to use an iframe and frame the content with javascript so that it only shows the content you want to show. Of course you'll have no control over the formatting (background, fonts) of the iframe and if the content gets bigger or changes position you'll have problems.

Categories