On Jun 6, 2014, at 9:52 AM, Ryosuke Niwa <rn...@apple.com> wrote: > On Jun 6, 2014, at 6:40 AM, Robin Berjon <ro...@w3.org> wrote: >> On 05/06/2014 09:02 , Ryosuke Niwa wrote: >>> I agree visual selection of bidirectional text is a problem worth >>> solving but I don't think adding a generic multi-range selection >>> support to the degree Gecko does is the right solution. >> >> I'd be interested to hear how you propose to solve it in another manner. >> Also note that that's not the only use case, there are other possibilities >> for disjoint selections, e.g. a table (naturally) or an editable surface >> with a non-editable island inside. > > Supporting disjoint range is probably necessary but adding the ability to > manipulate each range separately seems excessive because that'll lead to > selections with overlapping ranges, ranges in completely different locations > that are not visually disjoint, etc...
are visually disjoint. > We might need to do something like exposing readonly multi-range selection. > >>> For starters, most of author scripts completely ignore all but the first >>> range, and applying editing operations to a multi-range selection is >>> a nightmare. >> >> I don't disagree that it can be hard to handle, but I'm not sure that that's >> indicative of anything. Most scripts only handle one selection because AFAIK >> only Gecko ever supported more than one. > > Given Gecko itself doesn't handle applying editing operations to multiple > ranges well from what I've heard, I'm not certain we can expect web > developers to get them right especially in the context where disjoint > multi-range selection is needed; e.g. bidirectional text, exotic layout model. > > - R. Niwa > >
