Sharepoint 2013 Limit editing to just text - css

Is there a way to limit content editors on sites to just text? I would like to have them not inject any styles by using inline styling in HTML, or using any buttons in the editor.
I have a few rogue editors that go color and style crazy, and for the next iteration of the public facing site I run, I don't want any chance of that happening.
Thanks all!

There are a couple options I've used in the past - neither is ideal but they may help you.
You can disable features from the rich text editor. Read through this article - it should apply to SP 2013 the same but basically, you can disable color, font, etc from being applied in the RTE.
You can use jquery to remove all styles after the fact. $("#element").removeAttr("style");

I don't think you can accomplish this limitation using a content editor. According to Microsoft, content editor's are designed for HTML so any setting to disable HTML input would be counter intuitive.
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-sharepoint-services-help/about-the-content-editor-web-part-HA001160897.aspx
"The Content Editor Web Part is intended for adding HTML content to a Web Part Page"
I'm not sure from your post what you are trying to accomplish holistically, or what business need these content editors solve. Could you build a static page/template that fits your need (and maybe even looks like the normal content editor) but utilizes the rich text box feature?
using rich textbox in Sharepoint 2013

Related

Using Custom CSS Styles in Sitecore Rich Text Editor

Trying to figure out exactly what the limitations are, if any, in the Sitecore CMS Rich Text Editor fields when not using pre-loaded styles or modifying the Telerik RadEditor control. Basically want to know how far we can go using on page custom styles with the style tag. Will we run into any conflicts with existing pre-loaded CSS?
When committing style tags or inline styles to any RTE, it can be done, but don't do it. For one, if other editors are not aware of it, they can over write those styles with one change. Also style tags in the body of a web page will violate accessibility standards (depending on if your company needs to be 501 compliant). Also if your designer's classes are overridden, on the page it can be a nightmare to fix and maintain.
Recommendation: Typically I would make all CSS options for a rendering as rendering parameters, but if you really need embedded CSS, I would make a new text field on the template of the page/content, and have the developer pull that CSS correctly into the layout.
Here's a link, it's a bit dated but it does a good job explaining rendering parameters, which is the path I highly recommend:
https://sitecoretricks.wordpress.com/2018/03/31/understanding-the-rendering-parameters/

Add CSS Class attribute to Standard Umbraco Image Editor

I am new to Umbraco, and just discovered that the Image editor (the one that is included in selectable editors for content rows) does not provide a way to enter a CSS class. This is surprising, considering that it is pretty standard these days to use Bootstrap classes to style images (img-responsive, for example). NOTE: I had planned to add screen shots of this; however, I've been given a message that I cannot do this until I earn 10 something-or-other-points. THIS NOT HELPFUL TO NEW MEMBERS!
While I understand that I can set a class within the Umbraco UI on the containing column div, this is not ideal. I also understand that I could use the Rich Text Editor, but this seems to be overkill for a column that is intended to contain images only.
What I would like to do is modify the existing editor to allow users to enter CSS classes, but I cannot find it.
Has anyone made this modification to your own implementation of Umbraco, and if so, could you guide me to how I could do this?
The image picker just stores the id of the image, it's up to you how you render it, if the classes are the same for all of the images in the column, you can just assign the class in the view/partial that renders the images.
If you want to have different classes for each image, rather than modifying the built in image picker, best practice is to create a new property editor. There is a tutorial on this here: https://our.umbraco.org/documentation/tutorials/Creating-a-Property-Editor/. Modifying the built in one will cause you problems if you ever upgrade Umbraco (your changes will be overwritten). But a custom property editor will be unaffected, and you can also use it on other Umbraco sites that you build!

Is there any existing web control that permits the entry of both text and images in the manner of

I want to know is if there is any textbox-type web control out there that can approximate Word for simply WYSIWYG editing?
I am NOT talking about so-called HTML or Rich Text controls. (In fact I'd prefer if the users didn't play with colors and font sizes.)
What I need is a control that allows a non-technical user to intutively copy images and paste them in without having to fiddle with HTML tags.
Is this even possible in current web technology?
take a look at the HtmlEditorExtender, from asp.net ajax controls can be very simple, and easy to add to your asp.net project.
The full project: http://ajaxcontroltoolkit.codeplex.com/
You can use CKEditor. You can then customize it so that the options you don't want to show up (color, font size, html editing) don't show up. Otherwise there is no built-in .net control to accomplish this.

In Tridion 2009, is it possible to suppress the Advanced dialog of the RTF image tool?

In Rich text format areas, our site design dictates only a couple of possibilities for styling an image. These possibilities are offered via a FormatAreaStyles configuration.
If the author selects the image, opens the image tool, and clicks the Advanced button, they will be offered the possibility to choose from various formatting options, which are then saved in the HTML as inline CSS attributes. On save, these are then removed by the XSLT, which is confusing for the users.
To prevent this confusion, I would prefer not to show the Advanced features at all. What, then, is the preferred technique for customising the 2009 gui in this way? I recall that in earlier versions it was common to modify the RTF user interface via the XSLT, but I suspect this won't work for my scenario. Perhaps a GUI extension could be used, which used JavaScript to make the advanced button invisible. Does anyone know of such an implementation available in the public domain? What other techniques might be possible?
As John suggested on one of my questions (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10703177/is-it-possible-to-remove-the-upload-mm-component-button-from-the-sdl-tridion-2/10706405#10706405), you could try hiding it using CSS and the !important attribute to override the default CSS. That may be easier than using JavaScript, but not An ideal scenario.

An Alternative to VS 2008 Designer Screen

I thought the web page designer screen in 2005 was mediocre until I used the one in 2008 which I think is bad. There is an interesting white paper here:
http://www.west-wind.com/weblog/posts/484172.aspx
I've gotten very used to these WYSIWYG designers over the years, but I am looking now for a new way.
I make business web apps which call for data entry forms. I don't need anything particularly artistic, but I do need to be able to line up text boxes etc on input forms so that they lkook orderly and are convenient for the user. I use Telerik controls, and my skills with CSS are approaching passable.
People often mention that they don't use the designer, but they rarely state what approach they DO use.
What are some of the alternatives to using the VS designer?
I don't use any WYSIWYG editor for WebForms. I've found that there are no good WYSIWYG editors for HTML, let alone ASP.net.
My suggestion is to learn enough HTML/CSS/ASP.net that you care code entirely without the WYSIWYG editor. If you can't or don't want to do this, then you'll just have to put up with a marginal editor.
I think a lot of the time when people say they don't use the designer they just use the source view the majority of the time. The reason for this is the designer often generates extra HTML code you don't need or it can even be a hindrance such as adding extra css styles directly to your page, I have also had it create technically invalid html by putting bold tags in the wrong places inside a table (Although it displayed ok in most browsers).
If you are not comfortable with just the source yet, I suggest split view then at least when you are using the designer you can see what it is creating and edit to get it perfect.
Don't trust the designer over seeing your website in a few different browsers.

Resources