Hi Bob, > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Doyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 10:27 AM
> Robert, > > I believe contentEditable is coming along at Mozilla, and although our > own WYSIWYG XUL application is far short of the WYSIWYG XML editors at > Xopus and bitflux, we think it is a viable solution for low-end UI's > that only need to get HTML fragments (and in our case whole HTML pages) > edited without looking at the HTML code (which we prefer, frankly). I don't know if you follow mozilla bug #97284, but the primary Netscape engineer recently said that contentEditable is not in and it won't be unless someone else does it. From the bug's 'blog:' ------- Additional Comment #168 From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2002-12-05 10:55 ------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (comment 167)-- You are correct that right now the rich editing is only available on an iframe's document. When that work is completed, someone may be able to undertake the content editable aspects which will be much trickier. Will it stay this way? Hard to say for sure. If someone steps up and writes the code and tests it, it can go in. If not, then it won't. Personally, I won't be able to undertake this task for the foreseeable future (next 3 months). Are you sure you can't use iframes which contain the data you want to edit? >...is setting an entire document to designMode all there going to be Setting designMode in mozilla is done on an iframe's document (not the parent document). > > Have you checked out http://wysiwyg.skybuilders.com? I read up to: "Until Mozilla 1.1, true cross-platform WYSIWYG ("what you see is what you get") visual editing in the browser was only available from Java-based solutions, most of them closed, proprietary, and expensive. The one Java open-source WYSIWYG editor is not yet ready for prime time. " This not only seems outdated, it totally ignores MS's contentEditable and all of the other builtin functionality available. You should give credit where credit is due. best, -Rob -- http://cms-list.org/ trim your replies for good karma.
