Re: [w3c/editing] Removal of browser built-in Undo stack functionality from contenteditable (#150)

@tszynalski I think the problem is that even a mini-execCommand has many of the same issues that regular execCommand has, which is largely that four large browser engines don't have richtext contentediting as their top priority so bugs don't get fixed for long periods of time, while there are JavaScript frameworks out there that do have it as their priority so those libraries do get fixed and they need a way of dealing with input without having to wait on browser makers for too long. 

And who is to decide what goes into a mini version? Bold and italic is something probably all can agree on. But I see you also have underline, sup and sub. Then someone else may argue they also need font color, etc. and then very quickly we are back at what we have now. Execution speed is generally not much of an issue because human typing is limited, so running it in JavaScript is not much of a problem in that regard.

Maybe the solution to @tszynalski's issue of not wanting the user to have to download an entire JS library when visiting his site is to cache the library somehow and use it across sites? Basically what sites used to do with jQuery a few years ago.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/editing/issues/150#issuecomment-559191853