first, good luck to the guardian on this endeavor! :+) second, i can't help observing that efforts to use contenteditable seem to start with a rush of succe

first, good luck to the guardian on this endeavor! :+) second, i can't help observing that efforts to use contenteditable seem to start with a rush of success -- as the early results are always very impressive -- but then seem to quickly bog down in the particulars. bug-reports come in which are difficult to reproduce, typically originating from idiosyncrasies in an o.s., or a browser, or (in one thorny case) a _combination_. and although people have much enthusiasm for solving these glitches at first, the slog is generally endless, and, eventually, it wears down even the most determined. at least, that's what i have observed, enough so that -- once i started experiencing the bramblebushes too -- i pushed the contenteditable strategy off to the side. which was easy, since i've been a long-time supporter for light-markup. no, not markdown, since that thing is too primitive, and forked, and fragmented nowadays, and will give you a big dose of misery down the line. i built my own light-markup -- "zen markup language", extension .zml, based on the project gutenberg corpus. i have also built a phalanx of e-book authoring-tools over the last 20 years, and it's all come together now. the trick is making an editor that will be acceptable to both the light-markup adherents _and_ the wysiwyg folks, and i think i cracked that nut. i'd like your feedback on pre-release versions of some new stuff i'll have soon. e-mail me at bowerbird@aol.com if you'd like to play... and again, best of luck to the guardian people on this! -bowerbird