- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 16:04:47 +0200
- To: public-html-comments@w3.org, benjamin.poulain@nokia.com
Note: Personal comment, not a WG response. On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 07:59:50 +0200, <benjamin.poulain@nokia.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I was looking at behavior differences between browsers and the spec > regarding document.designMode. > > The way the attribute is defined in the spec makes it just another way > to formulate contentEditable for the document. With such a definition, > it seems overkill to have it since there are already 2 more generic ways > to express the same thing: contentEditable and CSS's user-modify. > > The implementation differs from the specification in the sense that you > cannot override the designMode by a child with contentEditable. See: > -https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22036 > -https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=462735 > > According to its documentation, the way designMode works on Internet > Explorer is yet another behavior: > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms533720%28VS.85%29.aspx > > With my current understanding of the problem, I think this should be > removed from the specification or explicitly deprecated. The differences > between released browser make the attribute unreliable for web authors. > I could not find in the archives why designMode was added to the spec, I > would be interested to the rationale behind this feature. designMode is needed for Web compat. If the spec doesn't match browsers, please file spec bugs. cheers -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Received on Tuesday, 26 April 2011 14:05:08 UTC