Re:Headless WYSISWYG Text Editor – tiptap editor
by hanspagel on Friday April 23, 2021 @04:49AM
(#26912537)
I’d love to see a more stable implementation of contenteditable, but I think it’s great to have all those choices. Use cases vary just too much.
Re:Headless WYSISWYG Text Editor – tiptap editor
by wrnr on Friday April 23, 2021 @04:35AM
(#26912455)
execCommand was used to add rich text to web mail clients, it's fine for writing once but not exchanging documents between browsers because of different interpretations at to what the commands do and how they handle nested tags ala <i><b></b></i> or <b><i></i></b>. Anyway prosemirror has a schema that provides extra info to how the tags should be handled: https://prosemirror.net/docs/guide/#doc
Also this is a much bigger design area then you might think.
Re:Headless WYSISWYG Text Editor – tiptap editor
by xavierlint on Friday April 23, 2021 @10:59PM
(#26921886)
As use cases vary too much, I don't think this is the browser's responsibility.
And browsers have taken the completely opposite way actually, with the recent deprecation of execCommand.
WYSIWYG is really the basic of tons of app, I would say as much as showing an <input> or using a <select>. And contenteditable hasn’t been of any help, it’s worse in fact.
Where I work, we decided to use Google Closure editor, which is really powerful, but is undocumented and adds like dozens of kbs to our app.
I really hope some day we wouldn’t have to rely on a third party dependency to implement an <input>. With how things have gone with WYSIWYG editor, I wouldn’t be so surprised though.