- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <andrew@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 16:58:55 -0800
- To: <public-html@w3.org>, "Geoffrey Sneddon" <geoffers@gmail.com>
----- Original Message ----- From: "Geoffrey Sneddon" <geoffers@gmail.com> To: <public-html@w3.org> Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2007 3:30 PM Subject: WYSIWYM editors > > One of many things I think needs to be done with HTML is make it > easier to be editable with a WYSIWYM editor, without having an over > sophisticated UI. > > Nobody has made a usable WYSIWYM editor for the HTML 4.01 standard as > it's near impossible, due to the complexity of the spec (such as > being able to explain in one line what tags mean). > > We must be able to: > - Explain, in a few words in layman's terms, what a tag/attribute > means. > - Parse current web content, without changing the semantic meaning. > - Create something that's understandable without any styling. > > How we do this, however, is questionable (and hard). > > All the best, > > Geoffrey Sneddon > I think that first we need to determine what is the use case(s) of WYSIWYM editors. Use case definition means: 1) Definition of context. Where WYSIWYM editing happens: e.g. is it, say, <richtext> input element in some <form> or is it full page editing mode? 2) Definition of the actor - user who is editing text WYSIWYM mode. His/her skills required, etc. Full page WYSIWYG is not possible in presence of CSS so I guess we can forget about it. To design basic principles behind <richtext> is feasible and really makes sense (at least for me). Blogs, BBs and various CMS are what popup immediately. So what is the scope? (For the discussion I can provide environment where various approaches of WYSIWYG editing can be modelled so discussion will not be notionally theoretical) Andrew Fedoniouk. http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Sunday, 18 March 2007 20:38:05 UTC