[whatwg] [editing] HTML Editing APIs specification ready for implementer feedback
rniwa at webkit.org
Wed Jul 27 16:51:31 PDT 2011
Feedback on sections 1 through 3:
- WebKit treats any font-weight above or equal to 600 as bold because
that's what user sees, and boldness is a binary concept in execCommand;
Firefox 5 appears to do the same.
- WebKit compares colors in rgb/rgba format; e.g. red is first parsed as
rgb(255, 0, 0). Firefox 5 seems to does the same as well.
- WebKit compares font sizes in legacy font size used in font element;
See CSSStyleSelector::legacyFontSize or legacyFontSizeFromCSSValue in
- Throwing SYNTAX_ERR might cause a backward compatibility issue because
the UAs don't throw an error now. We can probably throwing console messages
first to give authors some grace period to transition.
- For font element vs. span with style issue, we could add another
boolean flag that forces UAs to toggle font-element; i.e. add StyleWithFont
- 3.2: Prefix "webkit-" doesn't seem natural given all editing commands
use Camel case. Maybe Ms, Gecko, WebKit and Opera? e.g.
WebKitFontSizeDelta. But again this might cause a backward compatibility
because we do implement few editing commands that are not in the spec and
they are not prefixed.
- 3.3: The return value of queryCommandEnable depends on beforecut,
beforecopy, and beforepaste events and selection state in WebKit; WebKit
returns false if default actions are prevented in those events or selection
is not a range. Firefox 5 appears to do the same for selection but doesn't
seem to fire beforecut, beforecopy, and beforepaste.
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c at gmail.com>wrote:
> Since February, I've been working on writing a detailed specification
> for browser editing, primarily the document.execCommand() and
> document.queryCommand*() methods. These were created by Microsoft in
> the 1990s and were subsequently adopted in some form by all other
> browsers, and today browsers have to implement them to be compatible
> with web content, but no detailed specification ever existed.
> Interoperability is practically nonexistent as a result, which has
> driven all major content editing frameworks away from using
> execCommand(). Hopefully we can start to fix that and make these APIs
> a part of the web platform that just works.
> The current version of the specification is at
> <http://aryeh.name/spec/editing/editing.html>. It's about fifty pages
> printed, and supersedes the Editing APIs section of HTML
> (which is more like two pages). In the style of modern web specs, it
> is phrased in terms of algorithms that attempt to cover all corner
> cases unambiguously and leave no behavior undefined, and it tries to
> match the behavior of existing browsers to the greatest extent
> possible. At this point, it's stable and complete enough that I
> believe it's ready for serious review by implementers, and I would
> like as much detailed feedback as possible.
> to produce expected results for a largely undocumented and entirely ad
> hoc test suite:
> <http://aryeh.name/spec/editing/autoimplementation.html>. I used the
> tests as an aid to writing the spec, and they probably aren't well
> suited to aid implementers in implementing it. I will probably get
> around to porting them to something like testharness.js at some point.
> I haven't tried testing my implementation on real-world sites, only
> on artificial input, so I don't know at this point how implementable
> it really is, but the JS implementation means that it at least has
> large parts that make sense.
> Anyone reviewing the spec should be advised that I put extensive
> rationale in HTML comments. If you want to know why the spec says
> what it does, check the HTML source. I plan to change this to use
> <details> or such in the near future. There are lots of minor known
> issues still left, but none that I thought was important enough that
> it needs to delay review. Feedback can be sent to the whatwg list,
> CCing me, with [editing] in the subject. (I'm also fine receiving
> feedback on public-html or public-webapps, but I don't know if the
> chairs would be okay with that, since it's off-topic.) I should be
> available to respond to all feedback promptly at least through the end
> of August. After that, I can't make specific guarantees about my
> availability, but I do plan to continue maintaining the spec in the
> long term.
> I've CCd or BCCd everyone who's commented on or contributed to this
> spec at some point.
More information about the whatwg