Re: existing contenteditable spec

Ok, could I be added as an editor (there can be others) to this spec
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/editing/raw-file/tip/editing.html ? And can we
transfer it to this task force/working group?

I don't think any of us want to promise to have an entirely finished and
ready to go set of editing specs within a few weeks, but we will be able to
synchronize the editing efforts better if we have all the relevant
documents.

We should then also have a meeting, preferably F2F in Europe in the near
future to decide upon some of the controversial bits and hopefully come up
with documents that are reasonably close to start going through the first
steps of the W3C approval process.

@Ryosuke: To make sure -- You have split off the selection specific bits,
so that we can remove those from the draft spec, correct?

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Aryeh Gregor <ayg@aryeh.name> wrote:

> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 3:52 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On 5/18/15 5:15 PM, Johannes Wilm wrote:
> >>
> >> Hey,
> >> I was recently asked whether we are also editing this spec:
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/editing/raw-file/tip/editing.html
> >>
> >> This seems to be something creating under the WhatWG in around 2012 or
> so. It does contain some basic ideas on how execCommand some and some other
> essential contenteditable elements behave.
> >>
> >> I would suggest that we will take over this specification unless
> someone else is editing it and add anything related to execCommand and
> other contenteditable parts mentioned there.
> >>
> >> Currently our specs build on the concept that execCommand is being
> spec'ed somewhere else, so if such a specification already (partially)
> exists in a W3C spec, then we should build on that spec or replace it, or
> drop execCommand entirely.
> >>
> >> Anyone here who would like to edit this spec?
>
> The spec has not been actively maintained for a long time, and I have
> no plans to resume maintaining it, so anyone who wants to take over
> should please do so.  I think Ryosuke Niwa has already split off the
> Selection-specific bits, so double-check that before editing them.  If
> anyone wants to take over, I very strongly encourage them to keep the
> included test suite synchronized with the spec -- I'd be happy to
> explain how.  (Basically there's a reference JavaScript implementation
> that you need to update to match spec changes.)  I found the test
> suite essential in making sure that the spec was correct, since the
> subject matter is so complicated.  The suite has also proved
> invaluable for regression-testing in Mozilla code.
>



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