Joern, maybe we should add these comments to the bug report? -- Andreas
Joern Nettingsmeier schrieb: > Andreas Hartmann wrote: >> Joern Nettingsmeier schrieb: >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>>> DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· >>>> RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT >>>> <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42230>. >>>> ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· >>>> INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. >>>> >>>> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42230 >>>> >>>> >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: >>>> >>>> What |Removed |Added >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> >>>> Target Milestone|1.4 |1.4.1 >>> obviously, the move to XHTML2 is something for lenya 2.0, >> >> Isn't it just another resource type? > > true. what i'm after is a really well-defined, really picky backend > format that everybody could rely on, especially the editor maintainers. > currently we don't have a clear notion of what's stored in a document. > we have doctype-based validation, but there are editor hacks in there. > editors in turn have validation hacks in them, and the result is not so > nice. > > the reason why i consider it 2.0 stuff is that we would have to throw > away the old xhtml doctype, to get rid of all those hacks in the editors > and to have a decent editor abstraction layer at last. > > like so: > > XHTML2 with metadata and lenya-specific link and image elements (uuid > based, supporting on-the-fly resizing etc..) > | > V > generic pre-processing: replace link and image tags. > | > V > editor-specific pre-processing: hack the living shit out of the xhtml2 > format, to cater to every conceivable editor quirk > | > V > edit -> editor-specific glue -> truly generic asset, > + submit link and image dialogues > | > V > editor-specific post-processing > | > V > generic post-processing > | > V > validate [1] > | > V > store > > [1] the problem with validation (at least in tinymce) is that currently > users lose data when validation errors occur: the validator barfs, the > editor is re-displayed, but the document can't be saved again for > locking reasons. > plus the validation errors need not correspond to what the user actually > enters, due to post-processing. so we would need to provide a > step-by-step overview of the post-processing pipeline similar to what > the profiler does, to help the user figure out the real problem. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
