- From: Alexander Graf <a.graf@aetherworld.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 13:02:17 +0200
- To: Mike Schinkel <mikeschinkel@gmail.com>
- Cc: <public-html@w3.org>
If not JavaScript then there is XUL. I think it's far more practical to force browser vendors to implement scriptable GUI toolkits (like XUL) instead of creating a one- size-fits-all WYSIWYG editor. Such a control would have to be extremely configurable... - ag On 27.03.2007, at 06:58, Mike Schinkel wrote: > > Alexander Graf wrote: >> That was more a hypothetical statement. A good WYSIWYG JS >> editor is /possible/ just not implemented (yet). > > I would argue it is not implemented yet because it is difficult if not > impossible to develop a good one in Javascript. An editor is too > complex to > perform well when implemented with client scripting, and much deal > with > different browsers. It makes far more sense (to me) to see such > functionality implemented in the browser; if nothing else it > eliminates > browser incompatibility. > > -- > -Mike Schinkel > http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/ > http://www.welldesignedurls.org > http://atlanta-web.org - http://t.oolicio.us > > > > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 27 March 2007 11:02:41 UTC