Bug 515212

Summary:	Make the generic text editor the new default instead of the old text editor
Product:	[Eclipse Project] Platform	Reporter:	Lars Vogel <Lars.Vogel>
Component:	Text	Assignee:	Platform-Text-Inbox <platform-text-inbox>
Status:	NEW ---	QA Contact:
Severity:	enhancement
Priority:	P3	CC:	akurtakov, christian.dietrich.opensource, daniel_megert, Lars.Vogel, mistria, wywrzal
Version:	4.7
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	All
Whiteboard:

Description Lars Vogel

2017-04-12 14:10:24 EDT

Bug 497871 provided an extensible text editor. I suggest to make it the new default.

Comment 1 Dani Megert

2017-04-13 06:28:51 EDT

-1 for that, but I'm fine to hook it to those content types for which we already have an extension for the generic editor.

Comment 2 Alexander Kurtakov

2017-04-13 06:57:07 EDT

(In reply to Dani Megert from comment #1)
> -1 for that, but I'm fine to hook it to those content types for which we
> already have an extension for the generic editor.

Dani, would you explain why? There are things like the word completion which makes for way better user experience in cases where there is no specialized editor.

Comment 3 Dani Megert

2017-04-13 09:59:20 EDT

(In reply to Alexander Kurtakov from comment #2)
> (In reply to Dani Megert from comment #1)
> > -1 for that, but I'm fine to hook it to those content types for which we
> > already have an extension for the generic editor.
> 
> Dani, would you explain why?

The standard text editor should be the simple text editor that has no side-effects.


> There are things like the word completion which
> makes for way better user experience in cases where there is no specialized
> editor.

Can you explain what you mean? To my knowledge the Text Editor has spell checking enabled by default, allowing to use Ctrl+1 to fix/complete words. This is not the case with the Generic Editor.

Comment 4 Alexander Kurtakov

2017-04-13 11:07:48 EDT

(In reply to Dani Megert from comment #3)
> (In reply to Alexander Kurtakov from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Dani Megert from comment #1)
> > > -1 for that, but I'm fine to hook it to those content types for which we
> > > already have an extension for the generic editor.
> > 
> > Dani, would you explain why?
> 
> The standard text editor should be the simple text editor that has no
> side-effects.
> 
> 
> > There are things like the word completion which
> > makes for way better user experience in cases where there is no specialized
> > editor.
> 
> Can you explain what you mean? To my knowledge the Text Editor has spell
> checking enabled by default, allowing to use Ctrl+1 to fix/complete words.
> This is not the case with the Generic Editor.

See bug 514397 for details for word completion. If spell checking is the deal breaker, it can be added to generic editor too.

Comment 5 Dani Megert

2017-04-13 11:14:14 EDT

(In reply to Alexander Kurtakov from comment #4)
> If spell checking is the
> deal breaker, it can be added to generic editor too.

See bug 513314. There *is* a difference between a simple text editor and a more powerful one.