Open rhodges opened 5 years ago
This gives lots of control over how posts/pages look. We will need to be sure that is communicated to site editors.
List of content to test for (i.e., what content will be added to posts):
Task 3.3: Provide ability for ODFW to edit in a rich text environment (edit fonts and formatting, insert images and other content, etc.) for all Conservation Strategy pages
Expand ODFW RTF options across all Conservation Stratagy Pages
@rhodges or @ldford - Do we have a list of the kind of content that will be added to these new rich text editors (WYSIWYG)? Need to know what I should test against.
@pollardld regarding kind of content - I believe they are interested in text, hyperlinks, and photos. In addition, they want to be able to style the text. The ability to add photos seems to be a high priority
f465415f071a78d3d7d4893d3b27351d4380dd0b - initial commit adding wysiwyg fields to meta boxes
Concerns
From my review of the code it seems safe to convert the meta boxes used on custom post types from
textarea_small
towysiwyg
.However, assuming that the field type of
textarea_small
was used intentionally, then i have a slight concern that there may be unknown dependencies relying on field type `textarea_small. I cannot find documentation about dependencies. I have not found anything that references dependencies in the code.If dependencies are found, refer to the following for solutions:
With that said the field type of
textarea_small
could have also been used to simplify post editing, or something like that.