Re: on execCommand() and script-triggered copy/cut/paste

>
> It does not spec the behavior of contenteditable=true, it only specs
>> the existence of the attribute.  Behavior is covered by the editing
>> spec, same as execCommand().
>>
>
> So the existence of those features is at recommendation stage, but the
> speccing of said features is at editor's draft stage?
>

The real issue is that implementations have preceeded the specs. Nobody
*really* cares what the status of the spec is - I was there when Opera
implemented contentEditable=true, the pressure for adding it was immense
(users complaining, sites being broken, customers being unhappy etc.),
there was no spec even attempted back then - just had to reverse engineer
the others and write something approximately right.


>
>> On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Johannes Wilm <johannes@fiduswriter.org>
>> wrote:
>> > My experience with the bugs I have filed with browsers is that they
>> don't
>> > care about it.
>>
>> My experience as someone who somewhat works on Mozilla's editor
>> component is that 95% of the time, we don't care about it.  But
>> occasionally we do try to fix a bug for some weird reason.  :)
>>
>
Well, browser development moves in leaps and bounds. Usually, there's a lot
of urgent stuff to do - I assume you've been reporting these bugs during
the last 3-4 years while HTML5 / HTML Living Standard was churning out
shiny features and browsers were competing on adding them. Frankly,
polishing an existing feature that seems to roughly work (and besides is
very complex) isn't going to be priority during that period. But all of a
sudden, somebody comes along and takes a personal interest in some specific
thing and voila - lots of bugs might get fixed in a big clean up or
rewrite. (Without Ryosuke I suppose webkit would still churn out
apple-style-span code..). I get a sense you're being too impatient
(understandably) and not considering the timing and the browser marketplace.

Anyway, I think we have rough consensus on a plan - I'd like you to fix
https://github.com/w3c/editing/issues/61 and you'll also be labelling it
all as obsolete with a reference to the new stuff you're working on, I'm
going to keep exploring a solution that doesn't use execCommand().
-Hallvord