RE: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing?
± From: Aryeh Gregor [mailto:a...@aryeh.name] ± Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 4:59 AM ± ± On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Ms2ger ms2...@gmail.com wrote: ± FWIW, Aryeh is currently studying full time and doesn't follow web ± standards discussions regularly. ± ± I do check them from time to time, though, and will check any personal e-mail I ± receive for the time being. In particular, I'm happy to answer any questions in ± public or private about the spec, particularly to help a new editor get the hang of ± it. It's giant and complicated and very hard to read -- which I suspect is an ± accurate description of implementations' source code as well! (At least I've ± heard terrible things about WebKit's implementation, and Gecko's I've seen. As ± specs get more precise, their complexity eventually matches that of ± implementations . . .) Thanks for taking time to help here. Your work is a major advance from spec vacuum that we had in the past, it will be very valuable to have your perspective and input as (hopefully) we get to move it forward. Alex
RE: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing?
± From: annevankeste...@gmail.com ± Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 11:16 PM ± ± On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:14 AM, Alex Mogilevsky alex...@microsoft.com wrote: ± I am working on editing in IE, have issues of various scale that could ± benefit from a discussion in standards environment. Short of creating ± a new working group (which might be a good idea, but is pretty ± involved), is this the right forum to carry on a conversation? If not, any other ± suggestions? ± ± I believe it still is, yes. (Although the draft does lack an editor and I believe one ± of the persons actively working on this stuff at Google moved elsewhere within ± that company.) Good to know, thanks Anne! Now if this is the right place and a few people with interest in the topic start paying attention again, we could have a conversation...
[editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing?
It looks like Editing API draft is currently abandoned and there isn't any activity on the topic in this list for a while (as far as I can find in the archives)... I am working on editing in IE, have issues of various scale that could benefit from a discussion in standards environment. Short of creating a new working group (which might be a good idea, but is pretty involved), is this the right forum to carry on a conversation? If not, any other suggestions? Thanks Alex
RE: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing?
It is my understanding that Aryeh is currently not working on Editing API (https://plus.google.com/100662365103380396132/posts/KyADU8K54uK) and there is currently no successor or plan for further work... I would imagine there is still non-zero interest in the subject, would be good to have a place to discuss... From: Travis Leithead Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 8:56 PM To: Alex Mogilevsky; Web Applications Working Group WG; Aryeh Gregor Subject: RE: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing? Alex, work on Editing APIs was ongoing in the Community Group (http://www.w3.org/community/editing/) though their draft is just under a year old. Aryeh may have more current info... From: Alex Mogilevsky [mailto:alex...@microsoft.com] Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 8:14 PM To: public-webapps@w3.orgmailto:public-webapps@w3.org Subject: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing? It looks like Editing API draft is currently abandoned and there isn't any activity on the topic in this list for a while (as far as I can find in the archives)... I am working on editing in IE, have issues of various scale that could benefit from a discussion in standards environment. Short of creating a new working group (which might be a good idea, but is pretty involved), is this the right forum to carry on a conversation? If not, any other suggestions? Thanks Alex
[editing] defaultParagraphSeparator
There was a discussion here a while ago on desired default behavior for Enter in contenteditable and options for execCommand(defaultParagraphSeparator): http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2011May/thread.html#msg171 Did it ever get to consensus? Or is there new thinking on how that should work? Thanks Alex
RE: [editing] defaultParagraphSeparator
± From: Pablo Flouret [mailto:pab...@motorola.com] ± Sent: Monday, February 4, 2013 12:47 PM ± ± On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 11:59:46 -0800, Alex Mogilevsky alex...@microsoft.com ± wrote: ± ± There was a discussion here a while ago on desired default behavior ± for Enter in contenteditable and options for ± execCommand(defaultParagraphSeparator): ± http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2011May/thre ± ad.html#msg171 ± ± Did it ever get to consensus? Or is there new thinking on how that ± should work? ± ± I implemented this in Opera and WebKit[1], can't really tell from the ± bugzilla bug if it's in firefox too[2], but i think they were on board as ± well. ± ± [1] https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=59961 ± [2] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=748303 The Editing API document flags defaultParagraphSeparator as having issues, some are mentioned in the document and more raised in the discussion. Such as * default value (currently 'p', but not consistent in implementations) * default styles (if 'p' is default, it adds default 1em margin before first line, which most people consider undesirable) * when should Enter insert a line break instead of block (e.g. when inside pre)? * can/should the default block be set per editable area and how? * why only 'p' and 'div'? If there is a chance to settle on what's right for any of these, it would be awesome. Alex [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/editing/raw-file/tip/editing.html#the-defaultparagraphseparator-command
