TinyMCE4 customisation (TeamSite 7.5.0)

Hi All,

Has anyone had a look into customising TinyMCE4 for FormsPublisher via custom_config.js?

I'm trying to customise the available block formats and styles, which with TinyMCE3 would be done by:

IWTinyMCECustomConfig("custom", "theme_advanced_blockformats","p,h2,h3,h4");
IWTinyMCECustomConfig("custom", "theme_advanced_styles","Document meta=meta;Pull quote=pull-quote;Telephone=tel");

However, the TinyMCE4 bundled with TeamSite 7.5.0 only includes the modern theme, so those don't work anymore.

theme_advanced_blockformats is easily changed to:

IWTinyMCECustomConfig("custom", "block_formats","Paragraph=p;Heading 2=h2;Heading 3=h3;Heading 4=h4");

However style_formats is a little more difficult, I've not yet gotten it working.

Referring to the TinyMCE4 documentation (http://www.tinymce.com/wiki.php/Configuration:style_formats) you should pass an array of objects to the "style_formats" property, however, this doesn't appear to work using the IWTinyMCECustomConfig wrapper.

I'll keep looking into it myself, and will update here when I solveit, but if anyone already knows how to do it please let me know.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Rick Poulin

I haven't tried, but what happens when you pass an array as the third parameter of IWTinyMCECustomConfig?

If you dig into it and find that it only accepts strings, then I'd call that a bug which should be filed with support. At a minimum, it sounds like their documentation for 7.5 is already inaccurate, since they continue to refer to theme_advanced_*

Garth McMillan

Documentation is definately not up-to-date.

Passing an array, or a few different variations of object structures, either causes incorrect output (no items) or a full JavaScript error - causing TinyMCE not to instantiate at all. The error gets listed in the console as being unable to parse the data string in AdapteeTinyMCE4.js via eval() however, running the same code, and string, outside of the TeamSite context does correctly parse into a JS Object, so I think there's something else going on.

I'll look into it further at some stage, but it's a pretty low priority at the moment.

Rick Poulin

Zaarin wrote:
I'll look into it further at some stage, but it's a pretty low priority at the moment.

If it's a priority at all, I'd get that on support's radar now so there's some path to resolution already in place by the time you need it.