Re: On why we cannot (easily) delete/merge the editing specs

Hey list,

as there was no further response, I reverted the merged PR after consulting
with Chaals. I will now add the notes on the state of the files as
promised. I am guessing that we may want to take the need for these files
up for discussion again some time in the not too distant future.

Now I'm looking forward to discussing all the proposals that have come out
of the browser maker meeting. Looks like you did a good job in figuring out
some very complicated details!

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Chaals McCathie Nevile <
chaals@yandex-team.ru> wrote:

> OK, we've had a week or so of active open discussion. Let's revert the
> change made. While that isn't a formal Working Group decision, since there
> was no call for consensus, it's in line with our "editor decides in the
> first instance" work mode.
>
> Like any decision, that can be re-examined - a reminder of the basic
> process is that we leave editors to make decisions until someone objects,
> at which point we can raise an issue in github, and if that doesn't get
> consensus the chairs will produce a formal Call for Consensus, and then
> state what they believe the decision of the group is.
>
> Thanks to everyone who has participated in this discussion. The goal of
> the group is to find the right answers, with our procedures and process
> being a tool for that. I'm grateful that people have kept that in mind.
>
> cheers
>
> Chaals
>
>
> On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:16:42 +0100, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>> On Jan 19, 2016, at 14:03, Grisha Lyukshin <glyuk@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Makes sense. We should keep contentEditabletrue spec and move some of
>>> the items from execCommands spec into there.
>>>
>>
>> Agreed (although I don't think the moving items from execCommands is high
>> priority).
>>
>>  - Florian
>>
>> From: johanneswilm@gmail.com [mailto:johanneswilm@gmail.com] On Behalf
>>> Of Johannes Wilm
>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 7:21 AM
>>> To: Aryeh Gregor <ayg@aryeh.name>
>>> Cc: public-editing-tf@w3.org
>>> Subject: Re: On why we cannot (easily) delete/merge the editing specs
>>>
>>> Right,
>>> so most of your former spec currently lives in the execCommand spec.
>>> That spec has been updated and is alive, mainly because of the Clipboard
>>> API people who actually need a small part of execCommand - just not things
>>> related to contentEditable.
>>>
>>> A little too much has been moved into the execCommand spec. The items
>>> you mention about paragraph merging and splitting are at least in part only
>>> about contentEditable=True user keyboard/IME input without being related to
>>> execCommand. So maybe that could be moved. Once we get there we'll make
>>> sure to consult with you, Aryeh!
>>>
>>> On 13 Jan 2016 9:41 am, "Aryeh Gregor" <ayg@aryeh.name> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 4:24 AM, Johannes Wilm <mail@johanneswilm.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Eventually we should move some items from the
>>> > execCommand spec (about paragraph merging and splitting, etc.) into
>>> this
>>> > document, but one will have to spend some time trying to untangle what
>>> is
>>> > what.
>>>
>>> I mentioned it before, but I'll add again -- if you want good
>>> paragraph merging and splitting algorithms that (for instance)
>>> correctly preserve formatting, I think you'll wind up having to copy a
>>> large fraction of the contenteditable=true spec.  If you ever manage
>>> to devise some paragraph merging/splitting algorithm that's much
>>> simpler than copying a large fraction of the contenteditable=true
>>> spec, make sure to point me to it, because I might be able to notice
>>> things that it's missing.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
>  chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
>
>


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