Re: web input model (was "Re: The web doesn't need...")

No, there are several issues. One is input, another is normalization of the
caret.

The problem of needing to override execCommand is in part bugs in
execCommand that just will not be fixed, and in part that one just wants
different behavior than what the browser makers came up with. Making a
certain piece of text go "bold" can be achieved in many different ways, and
different editors will have different desired behavior.

I think we discussed this through several times and this is what we are
going for.

Discussing the purpose of this taskforce with those who have been involved
in it for a considerable amount of time and are making great progress is a
bit like going into a shoe factory and trying the people there that shoes
aren't really needed or that it would be much better if they would produce
cars, or some such thing.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 5:45 PM, David Young <dyoung@pobox.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 01:52:22PM +0200, Piotr Koszuliński wrote:
> > > 1. It is possible to write client code that implements all of this,
> > without using any contentEditable at all.
> >
> > No, it isn't possible currently. And there's a very long way to go before
> > it'd be possible. I've written an article to explain exactly this
> situation
> > –
> >
> https://medium.com/content-uneditable/contenteditable-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-261a38555e9c
>
> Would you agree that almost all of the obstacles to implementing
> contenteditable in JavaScript reside in the web input model?  As
> you mention in the article, an editor needs to assert keyboard
> focus, to avoid *accidentally* intercepting or conflicting with
> OS/browser key-chords and -compositions, and to *purposefully*
> suppress/override certain platform key combinations.  These seem like
> desirable input-model capabilities for non-editing applications, too.
>
> Dave
>
> --
> David Young
> dyoung@pobox.com    Urbana, IL    (217) 721-9981
>
>
>


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

Received on Wednesday, 9 September 2015 16:06:44 UTC