4 ms·
People are trying to make DOM be a WYSWIG text editor. You're point is dead on. The response is to write an opaque, vendor-specific "DOM". Which is the complet
by SavantIdiot 5y ago
People are trying to make DOM be a WYSWIG text editor. You're point is dead on.
The response is to write an opaque, vendor-specific "DOM". Which is the complete opposite of what HTML was supposed to be. But the browser is now a platform and not a browser, so the metaphors are horribly mixed to the point where I'm not even sure what a DOM is supposed to be anymore.
- wizzwizz4 5y agoThe DOM was always a WYSIWYG editor – albeit, for HTML, not text. Though, back in the day, HTML was a subset of text with image and table support; none of this fancy `line-height: 1.5em;`… I wish the web had evolved in a more documenty way.
- SavantIdiot 5y agoHmmm... maybe I should have chosen a different acronym. What you expected to see isn't alwasy what you got. WYETSIAWYG Rendering across browsers and operating systems was a trainwreck until maybe 5 years ago (over a decade of polyfill is finally gone). And even with an ecosystem like ElectronJS + Bootstrap, Win10 MacOS and Linux all look slightly different. So yes and no to "DOM was always...", but more "No."