- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 01:47:51 +0000 (UTC)
On Sat, 27 Nov 2010, Charles Pritchard wrote: > > Is there room for discussion of an API to expose misspelled ranges of > text in contentEditable? What's the use case? In practice, as far as I can tell, you'd either want the browser to handle all the spelling and grammar checking itself, or you'd want to do it all yourself. This would argue for an on/off switch for UA-provided checking, which indeed is available (the spellcheck="" attribute), and for ARIA exposure of the "spelling mistake" semantic, which is also available. On Thu, 2 Dec 2010, Charles Pritchard wrote: > > The use case is highlighting a misspelled range, which is currently left > up to the browser, as well as warning the user that there are misspelled > ranges. Doesn't letting the UA take care of this adequately address this use case? If not, why not? This may be an opportune time to remind everyone that there is a process for adding new features, and it begins with establishing use cases, researching existing solutions, and testing possible ideas: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#Is_there_a_process_for_adding_new_features_to_a_specification.3F On Fri, 3 Dec 2010, Adrian Sutton wrote: > > The major use case here remains being able to provide both spell > checking as you type and a customised context menu within rich text > editors. Today that is not possible on any browser that I know of and > it's one of if not the biggest selling point for our non-JavaScript > editor (we offer both Java applet and Javascript based editors). Insofar as extending context menus is concerned, that's not a spelling/grammar checking issue, it's a context menu issue -- and one that is resolved by the contextmenu=""/<menu> feature in the spec. > Notably, users do not want the full browser context menu with some > custom additions (though obviously this would make a good option for > some users) - having "View Source" for example is quite damaging to the > usability of rich text editors since it would display a read-only source > without running the editors source filtering, as opposed to the editor's > built in source view which filters correctly and is editable. There are > also styling considerations which are addressed quite well with the > current oncontextmenu handler and using pure HTML but which would likely > become quite difficult when trying to integrate with a browser's native > menu. I am skeptical about allowing Web pages decide what should be in the context menu. Adding things is ok, but removing things leads to a broken user experience. For example, as a user I frequently make use of "view source", and I don't think it would be good for a page to be able to remove that feature. On Mon, 29 Nov 2010, Charles Pritchard wrote: > > Currently, there's no way for an author to markup spelling errors in > text. A [spelling] tag would address that deficiency. > > This could be used for a number of reasons, from [sic]-style > annotations, to conveying to the user that an area is misspelled using > the same visual cues as contenteditable. > > At this point, it'd simply be a semantic element. If there's any > traction, we could certainly talk about additional attributes or another > name, such as sic: [sic]misspeld[/sic] > > Does the list need further use cases for its consideration? _Any_ use cases would be a start. :-) What's the problem you're trying to solve? On Tue, 30 Nov 2010, Martin Janecke wrote: > > I support this idea and I'd certainly use it. For example, I'm currently > copying an old rhyme book to hypertext and would love to mark > historically correct (but now incorrect) spelling, spelling > intentionally done wrong for better rhyming (yes, people did this in the > past) and unintentional errors from the book semantically. I think it is > important to note where those errors are done intentional (by me, the > publisher of the web page) in contrast to errors accidentally added by > me that differ from the copied book. <mark> is the element for this purpose. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 29 December 2010 17:47:51 UTC