W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2007

Re: 9. WYSIWYG editor (enforcing the signature) detailed review of

From: Sander Tekelenburg <st@isoc.nl>
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 20:19:37 +0200
Message-Id: <p0624065ec2d9170d1aa4@[]>
To: <public-html@w3.org>

At 12:46 +0300 UTC, on 2007-08-03, Mihai Sucan wrote:


> I don't "like" the above scenario. Having the document as valid, is ...
> practically... at the "mercy" of the generator meta-tag. I do not consider
> this anywhere close to "appropriate".

Fully agreed.

Some other problems are

- The lack of definition of "WYSIWYG editor". (Even a Word imitator like
FCKEditor may present content as it would be rendered, or only partially so,
or as uninterpreted markup, depending on (level of) javascript support, and
settings of both the authoring system and the client. In which cases would
the "WYSIWYG editor" signature be required/not allowed?)

- The fact that that "WYSIWYG editor" is usually an embedded app within a
larger app, not writing at all to <head>. So it is the host app that needs to
'know' whether content was provided through an editor that is to be
considered "WYSIWYG". My impresson of authoring systems is that they try to
avoid such complicated interweaving. For instance because one one the same
system is designed to allow embedding different editors (be they "WYSIWYG" or
not). Is there a strong enough need to impose such implementation challenges
to authoring tools?

- How should the host app deal with situations in which content is entered
through a "WYSIWYG editor", than edited through a non-"WYSIWYG editor", or
vice versa?

Note that this issue was raised a while ago on the whatwg mailing list. The
question why an authoring tool in specific would need to be allowed to insert
<font> was not really answered IIRC. If I'm not mistaken, the one or two
authors of "WYSIWYG editors" that participated didn't appear to see a real
need to be allowed to output <font>.

Sander Tekelenburg
The Web Repair Initiative: <http://webrepair.org/>
Received on Friday, 3 August 2007 18:21:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:19 UTC