On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 05:07:18 +0900, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Ehsan Akhgari eh...@mozilla.com wrote:
This sounds reasonable. The content attribute should be made
non-conforming in that case. Perhaps the IDL attribute should throw
on setting? Maybe
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 6:43 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 05:07:18 +0900, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Ehsan Akhgari eh...@mozilla.com wrote:
This sounds reasonable. The content attribute should be made
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 7:06 PM, Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org wrote:
When an element with an undoscope goes from editable to non-editable, does
it then get a fresh undo stack? When it goes from non-editable to editable
does it lose it's undo stack? I think the answer to both those questions
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 7:06 PM, Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org wrote:
When an element with an undoscope goes from editable to non-editable, does
it then get a fresh undo stack? When it goes from non-editable to editable
On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:27:21 +0900, Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org wrote:
I guess I'd be fine with saying that the undomanager is created at the
time the undoscope property is set, but I'm not sure what we can do
about the
non-editable -- editable case.
So that case is when you have
div
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
Allowing authors to define an undoscope inside an editing host appears to be
troublesome because user editing actions can modify the subtree of the host
in very complex ways, and it's hard to understand which node may be
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 7:26 AM, Aryeh Gregor a...@aryeh.name wrote:
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
Allowing authors to define an undoscope inside an editing host appears to
be
troublesome because user editing actions can modify the subtree of the
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
It also means you can't support :read-write for contenteditable, because
that
would make selectors depend on style resolution. Is it just a
convenience measure so that you don't have to implement efficient
property
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Aryeh Gregor a...@aryeh.name wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Ryosuke Niwa rn...@webkit.org wrote:
It also means you can't support :read-write for contenteditable, because
that
would make selectors depend on style resolution. Is it just a
Allowing authors to define an undoscope inside an editing host
appears to be
troublesome because user editing actions can modify the subtree of
the host
in very complex ways, and it's hard to understand which node may be
mutated
as a result of some editing actions or execCommand.
Hi,
Allowing authors to define an undoscope inside an editing host appears to be
troublesome because user editing actions can modify the subtree of the host
in very complex ways, and it's hard to understand which node may be mutated
as a result of some editing actions or execCommand.
Given that,
11 matches
Mail list logo
