@Kelvin Hill Speaking of nested tables, if you have the 3rd part View Source macro, you can add in the secondary table HTML into the primary table fairly easily. The macro also lets you remove excess Atlassian-generated formatting, which is invaluable for me.
Un-checking Enable Keyboard Shortcuts still does not disable keyboard shortcuts. So, they still get invoked instead of Firefox's instant page searching.
Currently is there a way to add files from Microsoft Teams onto Confluence? I know we can just use the URL link, but is there a neater way to go about adding teams files like how onedrive files can be added?
@Jeff Scattini Interesting observation/suggestion. I checked the list of plugins and found the Page Source Editor for Confluence Cloud plug-in (is that what you meant?) Sadly, we have 30 users, so licensing would cost us $360 per year—simply to access functionality that is being withheld by Atlassian for their own ease and convenience. The cost couldn't be justified.
It seems hopelessly counterproductive for Atlassian to remove client-side formatting options. CSS manipulation in the browser has zero impact on server-side code integrity. It's like the nice people at Atlassian intend to systematically choke us with a dumbed-down subset of content presentation tools to keep their lives simple.
Anyone who reports that the new updates look great clearly isn't using Confluence to prepare branded documentation for product users. I'd be perfectly happy with the new editor if my documents were exclusively for internal company consumption. Heck, I'd be satisfied with a simple text editor.
OK, so this situation is now both ludicrous and indefensible.
The iframe macro has been retained in the new editor. The iframe macro offers client-side customization using both Class and Style fields.
The DIV macro has been removed, however, on the basis that its Class and Style fields potentially compromise the integrity of the host. Utter nonsense.
Atlassian, please explain how it is safe to modify an iframe with CSS while it is unsafe to retain the DIV macro that affords the same level of client-side control?
And what's with the macro: Legacy macro - do not use? If Atlassian doesn't want customers to use it, why has it been retained?
@Kelvin Hill Yes, that is the macro I meant. It is definitely a shame that we have to depend on a 3rd party just to view our own code. And I absolutely agree with everything you just said about iframe and div macros.
I'm currently using Atlassian as an example in a local presentation about how dangerous it is for Product and Engineering to apparently be completely divorced from each other as well as user research.
This entire year from them has been ridiculous. It's like we're being rickrolled.
And, still, you choose to break backwards compatability to an age-old feature of all wikis -- creating a link to an undefined page that will be created in the future.
Boo!!!
This was a fundamental feature for top-down creation of pages, allowing the structure to be created now, and the leaves to be filled-in when needed.
All wikis have it. The "new" editor does not allow this to happen. That breaks a lot of decade's old work habits.
87 comments