• htmlArea and storing content

    By Alan Hurt 2 decades ago

    Without having really looked into the code, is there any compelling reason you are using a Text field to store the content of the htmlArea rich text as opposed to a Rich Text field which will hold a larger value?

    • I think its to do with editing.

      By Neil Gower 2 decades ago

      When I tried a while ago to impliment HTML area, everytime I edited a document using HTML Area that used a Rich Text field, then instead of the formatted text being opened in the editor, the raw HTML was..



      I could not see a way to fix this,,I did not think of using a text field !!!

      • By Alan Hurt 2 decades ago

        Interesting…I've had my own version of a rich text editor for a while now that uses the same principle as htmlArea (uses the DOM commands) and I have no trouble using Rich Text fields. My code is far more simple though so I cant make an educated comparison

    • Not sure why I used a text field instead of a RTF

      By Jack Ratcliff 2 decades ago

      I see that Neil says that it wouldn't work for him using a RTF. Have you got it to work? I'll try it out tonight and see what kind of results I get.

    • literal vs formatted text

      By Stan Rogers 2 decades ago

      HTMLArea puts HTML into the textarea. If you store that as Rich Text, you get escaped versions of special characters that will render in the browser as HTML source code. If you store as HTML+MIME, you lose the formatting cues if you then try to edit the field (only the text content is served to the browser, not the surrounding HTML). Using a text field, you get the literal content of the field back. In the browser, that means well-rendered HTML. In the Notes client, though, you get something only a devoted webhead would love. (Just as an aside, I use two text fields in conjunction with an HTML textarea element, splitting the content among the text fields on submit. That gets one around the 32K field limit. If it weren't for the total summary limit, you could use more.)