Froala WYSIWYG Editor: A Commercial Rich Text Editor You Install from npm

What Froala Editor V5 actually is, and who it is built for

Froala Editor V5 is a JavaScript WYSIWYG HTML editor. The README describes it as a rich text editor with 30+ official plugins, client framework integrations, and server side SDKs for PHP, Node.JS, .NET, Java and Python. That combination defines the audience: teams embedding an HTML editing surface inside an existing application, not people looking for a standalone writing app.

The repository is dominated by CSS, which tells you where the work sits. The top level holds css/, js/, img/, html/, an index.d.ts type definition file, and a package.json whose main entry is js/froala_editor.min.js. This is a distributable front-end asset package, not a service. You get files, you include them, you initialize an editor on a DOM node.

The framework list in the README is long and specific: Angular JS, Angular 2, Aurelia, CakePHP, Craft 2 and Craft 3, Django, Ember, Knockout, Meteor, Ruby on Rails, React JS, Reactive, Symfony, Vue JS, Yii2 and WordPress. Each is a separate repository under the froala organization. If your stack is on that list, the integration work is already done by someone else. If it is not, you are writing the binding yourself.

One thing to settle before anything else: this is commercial software. The npm package.json sets "license" to https://www.froala.com/wysiwyg-editor/pricing, and the repository root carries License.txt alongside Froala_ThirdPartyLicense.txt. The README links a License Agreement page. Nothing in the README says the editor is free for unrestricted use, so treat the pricing page as the authoritative source.

How the plugin and package build works

The mechanism is a core file plus optional plugins. The README's first bullet is the design statement: "Slim - only add the plugins that you need." The package.json npmFileMap confirms the shape of the distribution. It lists js/froala_editor.min.js, js/froala_editor.pkgd.min.js, js/plugins.pkgd.min.js, plus js/plugins/*.min.js and js/third_party/*.min.js. The same split exists on the CSS side: css/froala_editor.min.css, css/froala_editor.pkgd.min.css, css/plugins.pkgd.min.css, css/froala_style.min.css, css/plugins/*.min.css, css/third_party/*.min.css and css/themes/*.min.css.

The pkgd suffix means packaged: one file containing everything. The non-pkgd files are the granular route. In the CommonJS example the README gives, you require the core module and then require the individual plugin file you want:

var FroalaEditor = require('froala-editor');

// Load a plugin.
require('froala-editor/js/plugins/align.min');

// Initialize editor.
new FroalaEditor('#edit');

That is the whole data flow. The core attaches a FroalaEditor constructor to the global scope or exports it as a module, each plugin file registers additional toolbar commands and behaviour against that constructor, and instantiation binds the editor to a selector. There is no server round trip and no build step required by the library itself.

The module story is broader than most editors. package.json declares a UMD pattern, and the README shows four loading paths: a plain script tag from CDN, an AMD module through RequireJS, CommonJS through require, and transpiled ES6 through import. The ES6 example loads a plugin with a side-effect import and then instantiates:

import FroalaEditor from 'froala-editor'

// Load a plugin.
import 'froala-editor/js/plugins/align.min.js'

// Initialize editor.
new FroalaEditor('#edit')

TypeScript users get index.d.ts, referenced from package.json as the types entry. The README does not document how complete those definitions are, which is worth checking yourself before you rely on editor autocomplete in a typed codebase.

Installing Froala Editor from npm or CDN and creating your first editor

The README gives two install routes and calls the CDN the easiest. Start with npm if you want the files in your own bundle:

npm install froala-editor

Bower is also supported for older projects:

bower install froala-wysiwyg-editor

For a first run with no build tooling at all, the README's CDN example is the shortest path. It loads the packaged CSS, a textarea, the packaged JS, and instantiates the editor on the textarea selector:

<!-- Include Editor style. -->
<link href="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/froala-editor@latest/css/froala_editor.pkgd.min.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" />

<!-- Create a tag that we will use as the editable area. -->
<!-- You can use a div tag as well. -->
<textarea></textarea>

<!-- Include Editor JS files. -->
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/froala-editor@latest/js/froala_editor.pkgd.min.js"></script>

<!-- Initialize the editor. -->
<script>
  new FroalaEditor('textarea');
</script>

Open that page in a browser and the textarea is replaced by a toolbar and an editable area. Note the @latest tag in both URLs. The README recommends jsDelivr because it mirrors the NPM package, but @latest means the version you get can change between deploys. Pin a version in production.

If you are on a bundler, the CommonJS or ES6 examples above are the ones to copy, and remember that each plugin is a separate import. `new FroalaEditor('textarea')` with no plugin imports gives you the core editor; the toolbar buttons you expect may come from plugin files you have not loaded yet.

Where Froala Editor is the wrong choice

The licensing is the first constraint, and it is not a detail. The package.json license field is a URL to a pricing page rather than an SPDX identifier, and the repository carries a License.txt. If your organization requires an OSI-approved license, or if your legal review cannot accept a commercial editor license, this project fails at step one regardless of its technical merits. The README's own resource list points to a License Agreement page, not to an open source license.

The second constraint is markdown. The README, the topics list and the package description all frame this as an HTML editor. Nothing in the README describes a markdown source mode, a markdown storage format, or a round-trip between markdown and the editor's HTML. If your content pipeline is markdown-first, this is the wrong tool and you will be converting on both ends.

Third, the release repository is not where the source lives. package.json points its repository field at git://github.com/froala/wysiwyg-editor-release.git, and the README's issue link points at external repo guidelines. The tree you see contains built and minified assets under js/ and css/, plus html/, img/ and type definitions. If you need to read, patch or fork the editor's internals, the README does not show where that source is published. For a team that requires the ability to patch a dependency in place, that is a real limitation.

Finally, the browser support statement is a moving target. The README says the project officially aims to support the last two versions of Chrome, Edge, Firefox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 11, Safari iOS, and Chrome, Firefox and Default Browser Android. IE11 is listed alongside a last-two-versions policy, which is a contradictory combination to plan against. Test the browsers your users actually have.

Froala Editor compared with Tiptap and other open source editors

The comparison that matters is between a commercial plugin editor and an open source framework editor. Tiptap is the usual reference point, and the difference in approach is structural rather than cosmetic.

Froala ships a core file plus plugin files that register toolbar commands against a constructor. You install the package, import the plugins you want, and call `new FroalaEditor('#edit')`. The editing surface, the toolbar and the plugin set are provided. Customization happens through the editor's own plugin API, which the README describes as well commented and simple to use as a basis for your own plugins.

Tiptap is built on ProseMirror and exposes a headless model: you get the editing state and the commands, and you build the interface yourself. That means more code before anything appears on screen, and far more control over how it behaves and looks. Froala gives you a finished editor; Tiptap gives you the parts to assemble one.

Neither is strictly better. Froala's advantage is time to first render and the breadth of pre-written integrations. Its cost is the license and the dependence on a vendor's release cycle. Tiptap's advantage is licensing freedom and architectural control. Its cost is the assembly work, and a smaller set of ready-made framework bindings.

There is also a middle ground worth naming. When the requirement is editing prose and the output can be HTML, the browser's own contenteditable surface is free, but the README makes no claim that Froala wraps or replaces it, and the README does not describe its internal editing engine. Do not assume behaviour you cannot read in the documentation.

Release cadence, upgrade cost and license obligations

The repository is not archived, and the last push was on 2026-08-19, the same day v5.4.0 was released. Before that, v5.3.1 landed on 2026-07-15 and v5.3.0 on 2026-07-08. Three releases in roughly six weeks is a fast cadence, and the README reinforces it with a link to a changelog under the phrase "frequent releases".

That cadence is also the upgrade cost. The package.json version is 5.4.0, and the CDN examples use @latest, so an unpinned install silently tracks every release. Pin the version and read the changelog before moving. The README does not document a rollback procedure, a deprecation policy, or a long-term support branch, so plan your own pinning strategy rather than expecting one from the project.

The plugin architecture cuts upgrade risk in a useful way. Because plugins are separate files, a breaking change in one plugin does not force you to move the whole editor. The flip side is that plugin versions are tied to the core version, and the README does not describe a compatibility matrix. Test the specific plugins you import.

On licensing, the repository ships License.txt and Froala_ThirdPartyLicense.txt, and package.json's license field resolves to a pricing page. That is the entire picture available here. Whether your use falls under a free tier, a paid tier or an enterprise agreement is a question for the License Agreement page and, if the stakes are high, for your own legal review. Nothing in the README states the terms, so do not infer them from the repository being public.

Editorial conclusion

Adopt Froala if you need a plugin-driven HTML editor with framework wrappers and server SDKs already written, and your budget covers the commercial license that package.json points at. Do not adopt it if you need an OSI-approved open source license or a markdown-first editor; the repository ships License.txt and Froala_ThirdPartyLicense.txt but the npm license field links to a pricing page, so read both files before you commit. Verify first: which plugins your build actually needs, whether the free tier covers your use, and how the CDN version pin behaves in production.

Frequently asked questions

Official sources

1. froala/wysiwyg-editor on GitHub
2. Issues
3. Project website
4. README
5. Releases