CKEditor is 33% of OpenCart filesize

The OpenCart zip file is ~15MB.
About ~5MB of that is CKEditor (used for the main description editor)

Is it worth it?
I've seen a lot of alternatives to CK that are just as good and much, much smaller

1. TinyMCE is the most popular. Has a ton of features, just like CK... tho I'd bet most of those features are wasted. But at least it's smaller (1.44MB)

2. NicEdit is a very nice one and is extremely small with only one js file and one image sprite. This is one of the few in this super small class that supports triggering the "B" "I" "U" button states when highlighting. Doesn't have as many options as CK or Tiny, but as I said, I'm almost certain that most of those options aren't even being used.

3. Damn Small RTE is only 18kb and does all the important stuff

And there are more here:
http://jeez.eu/2009/10/31/17-awesome-rich-text-editors/

Perhaps OpenCart should come with a lighter-weight one to keep the filesize down, and CKEditor should be made available as a plugin that can be added afterwards.

Thoughts?

In addition, it adds more crap all the time. If you edit an existing "page" three times you are liable to have <strong><strong><strong>word</strong></strong></strong> around everything bold, and similar multiple <span><font></font></span> etc. all through the page.

I usually remove it CKEditor myself, edit my descriptions or whatever you want to call them with a text editor which allows me to view as a webpage - I use EditPlus, but there are many - and paste the actual HTML into the description hole.

For smaller carts with not a lot of items, I'll leave it in but always use the "Source" button and paste the HTML.

Yeah, I think CKEditor is a bit bloated indeed. If you guys want to change the default editor, please consider TinyEditor too. It's in a very early stage though, but i think it's very small yet beautiful out of the box.

I wouldn't mind seeing it change, but I wouldn't even consider tinymce. It's just a pain in the ass to deal with, and I never realized it was smaller than ck cause it runs much slower.

Really? I found it to be much faster than "FCK". "CK" is much faster than FCK.. but still so much. Still I think something tiny and single filed would be more than enough for a core version personally, as long as 3rd party wysiwyg editors was supported for those who are diehards

Hey,

The first thing you could do about ckeditor's filesize is to remove the _source dir (for v3.2.1, also the _samples dir) as they're not needed for the editor's functionality. This will reduce the ckeditor directory size to 1.84 MB from 4.48 with the sources included.

Second, please upgrade to a newer version (3.2.1 at the moment) because there are many bugfixes and features added to the one that is currently included in opencart (3.0.1). http://ckeditor.com/whatsnew/all

I use TinyMCE in my current shop.

5mb of editor on an filesize of 15mb is over the top.

I agree with you that there should be a smaller package offered and if someone needs "more" he/she can replace the default editor for another one.

If Damn Small RTE does it all, why not use that one?
Looking at it I see that it indeed does it all.

One sidenote; make sure we use one that has regular updates (if needed) or at least support and development.

i looked at Damn small but i found it a bit slow, maybe the Jquery had something to do with it.
My personal favorite is NicEdit. It's small, has a plug in for images and is a bit faster. This one is even great for converting all editable boxes on the fly.

For the best result however we must implement TinyMCE as the standard editor.

G.

d1uluv2h8 wrote:The first thing you could do about ckeditor's filesize is to remove the _source dir (for v3.2.1, also the _samples dir) as they're not needed for the editor's functionality. This will reduce the ckeditor directory size to 1.84 MB from 4.48 with the sources included.

That's a good point.

My view is, if it isn't broken why fix it? Unless another editor offers better functionality there really isn't a compelling reason to change it.

I'm for changing to another editor. As PeteVA said, CKEditor adds a bunch of unnecessary tags when you add and delete things (maybe all editors do that, but it's annoying). It also screws up the font when I paste things into it, so I have to edit the source anyway.

Of the ones mentioned in this thread, I liked TinyEditor the best.

rph wrote:

d1uluv2h8 wrote:The first thing you could do about ckeditor's filesize is to remove the _source dir (for v3.2.1, also the _samples dir) as they're not needed for the editor's functionality. This will reduce the ckeditor directory size to 1.84 MB from 4.48 with the sources included.

That's a good point.

My view is, if it isn't broken why fix it? Unless another editor offers better functionality there really isn't a compelling reason to change it.

Well it seems that some think it is broke because of the extra tag garbage that is added. For me, I just find that it takes longer to copy the admin folder alone compared to all other files. Seems like a major waste of bandwidth, disk space, and time. But perhaps removing the source folder is the first step

In this day and age I wouldn't call 5MB "major" at all. The ability to get rid of most of that by removing the source like d1uluv2h8 suggested is always there.

Every WYSIWYG editor I've ever seen has been quirky (to put it politely). It's why I do most work in source. Maybe there's a better one out there but I'm skeptical.

Qphoria wrote:Well it seems that some think it is broke because of the extra tag garbage that is added. For me, I just find that it takes longer to copy the admin folder alone compared to all other files. Seems like a major waste of bandwidth, disk space, and time. But perhaps removing the source folder is the first step

Of course it is, aside from lowering the file size it also brings the number of files down to 201 from 577.

About the extra tag garbage, i think we should give the last version a try before changing it. ck 3.0 was a complete rewrite from fck 2.x and i think there were a lot of bugs in those first versions, but they've come a long way since then

Also, you can check out this page which gives indications on how to output xhtml 1.1 compliant html:
http://nightly.ckeditor.com/5375/_sampl ... xhtml.html

rph wrote:In this day and age I wouldn't call 5MB "major" at all. The ability to get rid of most of that by removing the source like d1uluv2h8 suggested is always there.

Beat me to it!

I just don't like it, regardless. But to toss it in the bin over server space or even bandwidth to upload it is talking like it's the 1990's.

The average standalone shopping cart I host (well over 100 total) uses less than 125 MB of disk space and with over 200 total sites my TOTAL bandwidth is less than 90 GB.

Considering the minimums available from hosting companies, neither of these is much of a consideration.

I was once paying $40 for 40MB hard drives (Conner CP40 i think it was). Now you can get 1,000 times that for about twice the price. Storage and bandwidth are inconsequential.

rph wrote:Every WYSIWYG editor I've ever seen has been quirky (to put it politely).

I agree..but quirky at 100kb is better than quirky at 5mb

I guess I'm just not seeing this as a priority versus the other things the manpower could be devoted to. Remove the source and call it a day, I say.

Maybe its a bit silly to mention, but what about the cache files for you images. They grow beyond and i rather seen them resized on the fly. So i have 50Mb of images and 80Mb of cache images.

cached images are resized on the fly but only once, hence the word "cache"
It takes less work for your server to simply re-load an image than to regenerate the image, and its much faster.

So if your image folder is 50MB and you have
image1.jpg
image2.jpg
image3.jpg

Then the cache will eventually have
image1-250x250.jpg
image1-500x500.jpg
image1-75x75.jpg
image2-250x250.jpg
image2-500x500.jpg
image2-75x75.jpg
etc

So it will always be bigger, but it is for the sake of speed. You can delete those files at any time and it will regenerate them on the fly, but once you have all sizes of all images, it will stop generating

Because mainstream OC users are used working with CKEditor i would not suggest changing that. unless CKEditor gives a bad output or has functionality problems, i would not suggest replacing this editor.

My suggestion is to update this editor to a new stable version and delete everything that has no function inside Opencart to make it much smaller.

I'm not a expert trough, but looking at all the replay's above it seems some of you guys do know shit loads about these editors, so why don't you guys take the CKEditor source and tune it so it fits Opencart just as it should? I guess Daniel would import it in a future release

Its all the same. They all have the same functionality. It just comes down to which editor spits out more garbage code.