Re: [w3c/editing] Valid text element declaration for rich text editing caret accessibility (Issue #481)

johanneswilm left a comment (w3c/editing#481)

Hey @jabcreations ,
around a decade ago, we created this document: [contentEditable](https://github.com/w3c/contentEditable) [HTML](https://w3c.github.io/contentEditable). It contained a list of ["legal caret positions"](https://w3c.github.io/contentEditable/#dfn-legal-caret-positions). The background for that was precisely that there were too many cases where the different browser engines worked too differently. While it is relatively easy to avoid placing a caret in a specific place by moving it with JavaScript, the problem is much bigger if the caret won't go a specific place or will not render in a specific place.

Now the above document is [about to be retired](https://github.com/w3c/editing/issues/480). I hope we managed to get rid of most of the caret placement issues by filing individual bugs with the browser engines. But there may be more cases we didn't think of. And this is, I think, where your work would be valuable: Are there any cases in any of those elements you mention that you had issues with any browser not willing to set the caret where you wanted text to go? Or not willing to be able to render it there?

As for the second part - actually preventing text from going there - while I like the idea, I also realize that we have been resource strained in the area of text editing for the past decade and it doesn't look like it is getting much better in the near future. There is already a proposal for an API that allows the JS to control completely where new text can go called (edit-context)[https://github.com/w3c/edit-context] that is already being shipped by Chromium and so I'd be surprised if browser engines would be able to find the resources to create a second API to do the same.

But I could be wrong. 

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/editing/issues/481#issuecomment-2663025545
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/editing/issues/481/2663025545@github.com>