adrian at millstream.com.au
Tue May 8 20:13:36 PDT 2007
I have been following the discussion on the use of font tags for
WYSIWYG editors. Just thought I'd post some thoughts as a CMS vendor,
hope they are not out of place. Hope this isn't a double post, my
first attempt was moderated.
On 03/05/2007, at 4:48 AM, Adrian Sutton wrote:
> That's not to
> discourage the spec from going after the most ideal solution, but
> if we want
> the spec to be useful we do need to consider the impact these
> decisions have
> in the real world.
I am not sure I see how removing the <font> tag from the rest of the
spec, but allowing it for vendors using WYSIWYG editors is logical.
I am sure there are just as many ingrained CMS's producing <font>
tags in their output without using a WYSIWYG editor - they will need
to be modified to meet specification, but WYSIWYG editors get a
reprieve? Surely making a WYSIWYG editor remove font tags is no
harder than any other system. Or am I seeing it from the wrong angle?
> I wish you the best of luck with that project (no sarcasm
> intended). To date
> I have seen numerous people try and fail. In our editors we're
> trying to
> find ways to make it easier for people to generate semantic content
> leave the presentation to the stylesheet, but we still haven't
> managed to
> get rid of the allure of the font menu. We'll keep trying though.
Our CMS disallows any font menu/tags at all, has done for about 18
months. Sure some clients question it initially, but after an
explanation of the benefits no client has requested the feature be
added back in.
adrian at adrianlynch.id.au
More information about the whatwg