Re: User Intentions Explainer (was: List of Intentions)

Absolutely. if this division means we can get into a saner place faster
(and with a higher likelihood that it will actually happen) then I am all
for it.

Of course the long-term future of the web should be taken into
consideration as well, and as I understand it, this could be part of the
second part then.




On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Piotr Koszuliński <
p.koszulinski@cksource.com> wrote:

> I'm not sure if I remember correctly, but I believe that after long
> discussions we left the question "what should contenteditable=minimal be?"
> unanswered. First the intention events lists should be created, so we can
> see what needs to be handled. And this is what Ben Peters is working on.
>
> Still we may also take in consideration that there are limited resources
>> available for working on the specs. Therefore the whole work could be
>> separated into two *independent* topics:
>>  1. Intention events + execCommand.
>>  2. contenteditable=“minimal”
>
>
> That's what I was proposing as well - to have the base (which consists
> mainly of fixed selection API and intention events) ready as soon as
> possible, so hopefully browser makers can start implementing it and then
> we, editor makers, can start using it. This part will already improve the
> current situation a lot, but it's itself pretty hard as we can see. Then,
> if anyone will be still interested, a specification for default browser's
> actions can be created. It's a huge task and there are a lot of
> controversial topics like the famous delete/backspace behaviour when
> merging blocks and that's why I would not recommend starting these
> discussions right now.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 12:59 PM, Frederico Knabben <f.knabben@cksource.com
> > wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, 9 September 2014 at 11:13, Frederico Knabben wrote:
>>
>> I don’t think that browsers having time/will for it today is a good
>> argumentation for not doing it. The specs have a critical and noble scope,
>> of serving as reference for the future of the web. We’re talking about the
>> future after all.
>>
>>  Still we may also take in consideration that there are limited resources
>> available for working on the specs. Therefore the whole work could be
>> separated into two *independent* topics:
>>
>>  1. Intention events + execCommand.
>>  2. contenteditable=“minimal”
>>
>> “1” should be concluded asap, because it is the foundation for the
>> success of “2”. It is also compatible with the current
>> contenteditable=“true”, so it should enable sites/frameworks to fix the
>> current status of things.
>>
>> “2” is the ideal world. Something that would require much more energy to
>> get done right. Still in the beginning, there should be an agreement on
>> what’s in and what’s out. Following that, several specs can get started,
>> each one defining the default behavior we want for each of the features we
>> want “minimal” to have. The first ofc, would be “Selection” (and “Focus”!).
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Piotrek Koszuliński
> CKEditor JavaScript Lead Developer
> --
> CKSource - http://cksource.com
> --
> Follow CKEditor on: Twitter <http://twitter.com/ckeditor> | Facebook
> <http://www.facebook.com/ckeditor> | Google+
> <https://plus.google.com/107736718646302128806> | LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/cksource>
>



-- 
Johannes Wilm
Fidus Writer
http://www.fiduswriter.org