<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Invisible Formatting Tag Problem</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.symphonious.net/2006/06/12/the-invisible-formatting-tag-problem/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.symphonious.net/2006/06/12/the-invisible-formatting-tag-problem/</link>
	<description>Living in a state of accord.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 07:41:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Symphonious &#187; Almost All WYSIWYG Text Editors Suck?</title>
		<link>http://www.symphonious.net/2006/06/12/the-invisible-formatting-tag-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-33757</link>
		<dc:creator>Symphonious &#187; Almost All WYSIWYG Text Editors Suck?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Oct 2006 02:23:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.symphonious.net/2006/06/12/the-invisible-formatting-tag-problem/#comment-33757</guid>
		<description>[...] Not so. In fact, the Swing text APIs are far more based on an attributed text array than on a tree structure (as I&#039;ve previously noted). There is a tree structure present, but it&#039;s a secondary structure to the text array which brings it much closer to the user&#039;s mental model of the document. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Not so. In fact, the Swing text APIs are far more based on an attributed text array than on a tree structure (as I&#39;ve previously noted). There is a tree structure present, but it&#39;s a secondary structure to the text array which brings it much closer to the user&#39;s mental model of the document. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adrian Sutton</title>
		<link>http://www.symphonious.net/2006/06/12/the-invisible-formatting-tag-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-20428</link>
		<dc:creator>Adrian Sutton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2006 12:14:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.symphonious.net/2006/06/12/the-invisible-formatting-tag-problem/#comment-20428</guid>
		<description>As I quoted, &quot;[t]he problem of the invisible formatting goes directly to the heart of the limitations of WYSIWYG editors&quot;. There is no invisible formatting here and need not be as I&#039;ve shown. The problem of the deleting of a hyperlink is an expected behavior of Outlook, it&#039;s in the requirements. Whether or not that decision was a good one can be argued, but it is no different than arguing whether or not HTML is a good markup language instead of whether markup languages are good or not.

Just as there are different ways of handling formatting and structure in a graphical editor, there are different ways of rendering HTML markup and interpreting user actions in a text editor which may not be intuitive to the user.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As I quoted, &#8220;[t]he problem of the invisible formatting goes directly to the heart of the limitations of WYSIWYG editors&#8221;. There is no invisible formatting here and need not be as I&#8217;ve shown. The problem of the deleting of a hyperlink is an expected behavior of Outlook, it&#8217;s in the requirements. Whether or not that decision was a good one can be argued, but it is no different than arguing whether or not HTML is a good markup language instead of whether markup languages are good or not.</p>
<p>Just as there are different ways of handling formatting and structure in a graphical editor, there are different ways of rendering HTML markup and interpreting user actions in a text editor which may not be intuitive to the user.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alastair</title>
		<link>http://www.symphonious.net/2006/06/12/the-invisible-formatting-tag-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-20407</link>
		<dc:creator>Alastair</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2006 10:36:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.symphonious.net/2006/06/12/the-invisible-formatting-tag-problem/#comment-20407</guid>
		<description>I suspect you&#039;re quite right in supposing that most editors do not use internal formatting tags inline with the text being edited. But I didn&#039;t make that assumption. All I said was that the formatting tag - whether inline or maintained by an offset in a separate data structure - was deleted when the immediately-preceding character was deleted. This is observed behaviour, and should not be controversial.

Either way, it doesn&#039;t invalidate my argument, namely that there are different ways of handling the offsets/tags when the underlying text is edited, and these may not be intuitive to the user.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suspect you&#8217;re quite right in supposing that most editors do not use internal formatting tags inline with the text being edited. But I didn&#8217;t make that assumption. All I said was that the formatting tag &#8211; whether inline or maintained by an offset in a separate data structure &#8211; was deleted when the immediately-preceding character was deleted. This is observed behaviour, and should not be controversial.</p>
<p>Either way, it doesn&#8217;t invalidate my argument, namely that there are different ways of handling the offsets/tags when the underlying text is edited, and these may not be intuitive to the user.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
