29 Jan
2010
29 Jan
'10
3:46 p.m.
Vincent Massol wrote:
On Jan 29, 2010, at 3:33 PM, Jerome Velociter wrote:
OK.
How do you handle (mark?) content deletion?
Even if it's possible to implement this in JavaScript somehow (though I
think it's pretty hard - you have to arbitrate and decide who you think
is modifying the DOM for every modification : an extension ? or the
normal behavior of the WYSIWYG ? + the fact that you have to observe
change on potentially a very big DOM tree, and that every key stroke
will trigger one more event to be handled, this slowing down the editor,
etc.) I think it's over-engineering for the little value it brings.
Still +1 to remove JSX inclusions.
Jerome.
Vincent Massol wrote:
No I meant protect the DOM when in wysiwyg edit mode.
I have no idea if it's possible. We have the same issue for the XDOM when a
transformation makes a change in other parts of the XDOM and we need to protect it (by
adding markers around the changes). The way I plan to implement this is to implement a
TransformationXDOM which is an extension of the default XOM implementation and that
automatically adds markers when a change is done outside of its zone. On Jan 29, 2010, at 3:04 PM, Marius Dumitru
Florea wrote:
What
do you mean protect the DOM ?
If you mean prevent DOM modifications by the extensions, I think it is a
hard problem, and it does not really make sense (what the point of
including extensions to not discriminate vs. view mode if in the end
they cannot affect the DOM ?)
But maybe that's not what you mean. Hi devs,
Right now JavaScript extensions are included when a document is rendered
in WYSIWYG edit mode. This has both advantages and disadvantages.
Pro: If the output of a macro depends on a JavaScript extension, then
the result of rendering that macro will be the same in view mode and
(WYSIWYG) edit mode.
Con: If the JavaScript extension is not aware of the edit mode then it
can modify the DOM document outside of the read-only macro markers which
leads to unwanted changes in the content of the edited document (i.e.
the modifications done by the JavaScript extension are saved). Such an
example is http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-4665 .
Before deciding
isn't there a possibility to protect the DOM? Is there no way to do that?
Thanks
-Vincent
Jerome.
> We're going to do something a little similar for the rendering is there's
invalid HTML entered:
> http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-3782
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
>> WDYT? Should we limit the WYSIWYG in order to make the editing safer?
>>
>> I'm +0.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Marius
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs