contenteditable vs Rich Text Editor Libraries
Developers should use the contenteditable attribute when building applications that require user-generated content editing directly in the UI, such as WYSIWYG editors, collaborative tools, or inline form inputs, as it reduces the need for external editing libraries and simplifies implementation meets developers should use rich text editor libraries when building applications that require user-generated content with formatting, such as blog posts, comments, emails, or documentation editors. Here's our take.
contenteditable
Developers should use the contenteditable attribute when building applications that require user-generated content editing directly in the UI, such as WYSIWYG editors, collaborative tools, or inline form inputs, as it reduces the need for external editing libraries and simplifies implementation
contenteditable
Nice PickDevelopers should use the contenteditable attribute when building applications that require user-generated content editing directly in the UI, such as WYSIWYG editors, collaborative tools, or inline form inputs, as it reduces the need for external editing libraries and simplifies implementation
Pros
- +It is particularly useful for prototyping or lightweight editing features where full-featured rich-text editors like CKEditor or TinyMCE would be overkill, offering a native, accessible way to enable editing with minimal code
- +Related to: html, javascript
Cons
- -Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case
Rich Text Editor Libraries
Developers should use rich text editor libraries when building applications that require user-generated content with formatting, such as blog posts, comments, emails, or documentation editors
Pros
- +They are essential for improving usability by allowing non-technical users to create styled content easily, and they often include features like image uploads, tables, and real-time collaboration
- +Related to: javascript, react
Cons
- -Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case
The Verdict
These tools serve different purposes. contenteditable is a concept while Rich Text Editor Libraries is a library. We picked contenteditable based on overall popularity, but your choice depends on what you're building.
Based on overall popularity. contenteditable is more widely used, but Rich Text Editor Libraries excels in its own space.
Disagree with our pick? nice@nicepick.dev