On 01/29/2010 03:04 PM, Marius Dumitru Florea wrote: > Hi devs, > > Right now JavaScript extensions are included when a document is rendered > in WYSIWYG edit mode. This has both advantages and disadvantages. > > Pro: If the output of a macro depends on a JavaScript extension, then > the result of rendering that macro will be the same in view mode and > (WYSIWYG) edit mode. > > Con: If the JavaScript extension is not aware of the edit mode then it > can modify the DOM document outside of the read-only macro markers which > leads to unwanted changes in the content of the edited document (i.e. > the modifications done by the JavaScript extension are saved). Such an > example is http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-4665 . > > WDYT? Should we limit the WYSIWYG in order to make the editing safer? > > I'm +0.
+1 If some script should be executed in edit mode, I think a possible solution would be to add a new field to the JSX class to tell if the extension should be used in edit mode, too. By default it should be false. The problem is that this doesn't fix file extensions, and those are the ones that cause problems now. So, at least for file extensions, they should always be disabled in edit mode. -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
