I"m not defending anything either, at least not if what you are saying you want is a WYSIWYG page builder. Now I personally would hate that if it meant I could no longer dive into the code but if that was your expectation then I can see why you'd be annoyed. I don't really follow how they've marketed IPC to know if they have made it out to be WYSIWYG or if that is just what you want it to be.
I do think that anyone with HTML and CSS knowledge will be able to understand it after some learning and produce highly customized pages with little effort.
Because from a programmers standpoint looking at IPC I would think with just HTML and CSS knowledge that it would be pretty easy to do some fairly detailed and different pages. I know I have been able to create databases, populate them with data, add feed blocks to display the data and comments elsewhere with very little programming usage other than some HTML CSS work. When I combine that with my programming knowledge I can pretty much make it do anything I want. I don't consider the learning curve that steep, although I have been using IPC to power some custom web apps for about 3 years now so perhaps I'm looking at it through rose colored glasses.
Ah I see I actually already have a CKEditor plugin that I use in my 3.3 board that allows a user to search the contents of that file (in case they don't remember the specific option/content combo). So in the new system my plugin could basically do the same thing except it wouldn't insert the BBCode it would insert the custom HTML that the bbcode would have parsed to. That sound correct?
If it is, that works I suppose, but does it mean that it would be impossible to manually type in the old bbcode and have it work right?
Can someone explain how this could be accomplished in the new system
I have a custom bbcode that goes to a php file that stores an array and looks up some data based on the option/content passed in.
So using the option and content I get 4 or 5 pieces of data and then return something like:
<a href="DATA1" class="popup" data-more="DATA2" data-stillmore="DATA3">CONTENT OPTION DATA4</a>
then I have a prototypejs or jQuery function watching which adds the ability to hover over the link and show the data.
Is something like this possible in the new system?
I'm curious, wouldn't it be much easier to just let the BBCode and WYSIWYG live side by side? I don't know but all this talk sounds like most of the problems comes from converting BBCode to the WYSIWYG version but would it really be so bad if I typed in [ b] to bold and then used the button to bold something different and it produced the same results. Then when it is time to edit it displays the BBCode where they entered BBCode and WYSIWYG where they used the buttons?
It works, I manually changed the URL by replacing the  with the url encoded version and created a link back to my boards on an external website (exactly like above just with my forum name and tags). The original version with the unencoded  did not work on the external boards, even if the url was wrapped in quotes in the bbcode. The changed version worked fine and pulled up the correct articles.
Even if it didn't work though, IMO it is something that would need changing because it causes this problem for no real reason, other characters could be used as delemiters instead of ones which brake bbcode parsing for an average user that just wants to share a link.
the presence of the  in the link/url means that when someone clicks on the tag and copies the link that it can mess up when pasting it to the forums or using it in other places that support bbcode. Most BBCode parsers will break on the extra square brackets.
I suggest that the end portion be returned url encoded, like so