- From: Alain Couthures <alain.couthures@agencexml.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 19:16:48 +0200
- To: Markus Ernst <derernst@gmx.ch>
- Cc: whatwg <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>, Mikko Rantalainen <mikko.rantalainen@peda.net>, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
Le 14/09/2012 09:50, Markus Ernst a écrit : > Am 13.09.2012 23:06 schrieb Ojan Vafai: >> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Alain Couthures < >> alain.couthures@agencexml.com> wrote: >> >>> Le 07/09/2012 12:32, Mikko Rantalainen a écrit : >>> >>> 2012-09-07 11:57 Europe/Helsinki: Hugh Guiney: >>>> >>>>> JavaScript into, say, a hidden form field. I think that there should >>>>> be some mechanism to associate contentEditable elements with >>>>> forms—maybe the combination of contentEditable="true" and the >>>>> presence >>>>> of @name creates an implicit form control? The value sent to the >>>>> server could be equivalent to that element's innerHTML. Thoughts? >>>>> >>>> The contenteditable attribute is meant for low level wysiwyg-editor >>>> like >>>> behavior framework and it is not meant to work standalone without >>>> scripting. >>>> >>>> I'd suggest supporting <textarea type="text/html"> with a built-in >>>> HTML >>>> wysiwyg editor if any UA wants to support HTML editing without >>>> JavaScript. In that case, the UA should provide a scriptable method >>>> for >>>> detecting for native support of type="text/html". As a result, a CMS >>>> system could fallback to e.g. TinyMCE or CKeditor to emulate the >>>> missing >>>> support. >>>> >>>> @type should only contain a type name, such as "date" or "number", and >>> "text/html" is a media type so "html" would be more appropriate from my >>> point of view. >>> >>> I can mention that XForms has the same problematic and I implemented a >>> wysiwyg editor support in my own XForms implementation with TinyMCE for >>> XForms textarea control. In XForms, the type associated to the >>> target node >>> is used to automatically adapt the control rendering. >>> >>> BTW, I even consider that "textarea" would be useless if only a >>> "multilined" type could be supported for the input field. A select >>> field >>> would be an input field for an enumeration... So input tag would cover >>> every possibility! >>> >> >> I think this is a problem that we need to address more generally. I'm >> not >> sure what the API should look like, but it's not specific to >> contentEditable. I should be able to make a Web Component that submits >> specific values with forms based off it's content. If we solve that >> problem >> right, it'll be possible to make contentEditable elements submit with >> forms >> without extra JS code. > > We have the @form attribute in form controls, as described in > 4.10.18.3. If @form was made a global attribute, every element could > be associated with a form. > > If an element contains a @name attribute and a @form attribute, and > there is a form with the name specified in the @form attribute, then > the inner HTML of the element will be submitted with this form. > > (As the submitted value is a string, I believe this would not even be > a problem if the element is the form itself or one of its ancestor > elements.) > The inner HTML of the element would only contain serialized HTML while there are components able to edit many kind of texts, such as editarea ( http://sourceforge.net/projects/editarea/), which are not rendered in raw mode by the component.
Received on Friday, 14 September 2012 17:17:28 UTC