Forum Moderators: phranque
<?php include "top.php";?>
PAGE SPECIFIC HTML & PHP HERE
<?php include "bottom.php";?>
I've been fruitlessly searching for months for a wysiwyg with the following deceptively simple criteria:
-open source (read:free)
-ftp integration
-wysiwyg that WONT ruin my php header/footer system by surrounding each page with HTML BODY and other annoying tags.
The only editor I know that doesn't add annoying/unnecessary markup to php files is Dreamweaver, but that is $$ and I don't want to charge my clients for that.
Please, any and all help is appreciated.
However, by far the best way forward is a proper CMS running on the server. There are loads out there which are free (GPL), but you might want to look in particular at Mambo Server and Typo 3, which are both very popular. Using a CMS means that the client can control the site content simply through the browser instead of a client-side program, and there is no FTP or other operations other than a simple click to publish.
Installing a CMS and building the template is more costly for the client at the outset, but it more than pays for itself even in the short-term. You should never have to teach HTML to a client.
I feel that CMSs limit me greatly.
The web-based wysiwygs are incomplete, and only seem to work from one directory.
The client programs (except dreamweaver) seem to rely on some Internet Explorer renderer that tries to convert my php files to compliant XHTML files, adding annoying tags.
I would settle for an open source solution that does what dreamweaver can:
-opens up the php file
-in the wysiwyg view the php isn't really editable, and not altered when the user adds a table or a list or changes some text.
-Then they upload the file with a click.
Easy. Except Dreamweaver costs $400. Id rather them pay ME that.
Any program which is wysiwyg would have to parse the php include statements in order to display the page for editing. That would mean running PHP on the client machine. As offline editors (other than Dreaweaver to a certain extent) generally don't or can't parse them, they are forced to "correct" the problem. If they can't parse the includes, what the client would see offline would not be what they get server-side.
I still am unsure why a CMS doesn't do what you want: you set all the parameters to ensure a common look and feel for the pages - all the client has to do is add the text, and the CMS adds the styles to the finished document.