Re: [editing-explainer] Should execCommand be spec'd to do nothing in cE=typing? (#33)

I'm siding with Koji on this one.

Unless there is something that one can not do without execCommands, we should not allow them in the ce=typing world given that (IIUC) it tries to avoid the sins of the past. If the minimal viable product needs some of the execCommands then Koji's suggestion of a whitelist with spec-ed behaviors(*) in these new ce contexts seems reasonable. 

Furthermore, if we keep them around in these new ce contexts as-is, we would loose some on the opportunity to deprecate and/or supersede these non interoperable buggers, right?

*: if these chosen few are known to have interoperability issues.

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/editing-explainer/issues/33#issuecomment-68666602