what makes that hard now?  You can make it not show the changes...

Yes, but you can't copy styling and markup properly. So if you don't want to revert the entire card it can be a major pain.

  --John Abbe.....Fri Feb 06 19:57:27 -0800 2009

sounds right. Moved to low pri because we won't get to this until we redo the whole Changes tab, but the tag will ensure that we see it then.

  --Ethan McCutchen.....Wed Feb 25 10:24:11 -0800 2009

I think we are putting unrendered text in the changes tab now, at least for "hide changes". so this works, no?

  --Ethan McCutchen.....Mon Nov 15 08:49:42 -0800 2010

The idea is to be able to copy Wagn markup, with brackets and braces. Also, even with hide changes, there's a span around the text.

  --John Abbe.....Mon Nov 15 15:22:16 -0800 2010

Look at the changes for this discussion (hiding diffs). You see the link markup. That's what we want, no? Not sure I know what span you mean.

  --Ethan McCutchen.....Mon Nov 15 15:30:37 -0800 2010

Sho' nuff! I asserted the lack of brackets without actually testing, so that part's all good.

The span (and a div) can be seen if you look at the HTML in edit mode at http://test.dwagn.org/wagn/text_from_Changes_tab (They even have classes when it's first pasted in, but that gets stripped when saving.)

  --John Abbe.....Mon Nov 15 16:00:08 -0800 2010

Did you miss my persnickitiness? ;-)

  --John Abbe.....Mon Nov 15 16:00:31 -0800 2010

oh, that's all outside of the revision content, right? Don't know what can be done about that. No way to format the revision unless it's in a tag with a class. I suppose we could put it all in an edit box or a separate page, but that seems a bit extreme.

  --Ethan McCutchen.....Mon Nov 15 16:08:18 -0800 2010

Is there a reason that we don't strip enclosing spans and divs when saving Basic cards?

  --John Abbe.....Mon Nov 15 17:36:25 -0800 2010

They're not in the content; you can see that by clicking edit. They're part of how the revision is displayed on the page when you click to the changes tab. You have to put the content somewhere on the page, and you have to give it a class if you're going to allow wagneers to format it with css. eg, for us it's yellow; that css class makes it possible. I'm not hellbent on yellow by any stretch, but you have to have identifiers. If we took away that div and span, then when you went to highlight the thing it would just move to the next container out.

  --Ethan McCutchen.....Mon Nov 15 17:51:31 -0800 2010

I'm not proposing removing the span and div from the changes tab. So when you copy the text, you get them, that's fine. Then you paste in an edit box and they're there. When you click submit, we already strip out the class="revision" from the div - what I'm asking is, is there any reason to not just strip the div out altogether?

  --John Abbe.....Mon Nov 15 22:23:40 -0800 2010

oh! I think I at least get the question now.

The stripping is done on the basis of what "allowable" content should be in basic cards. The same stripping occurs regardless of how the content got there. So the question becomes: should we not allow a wrapping div in basic content? Since we're planning on changing p's to div's, we have to translate that even further into *nested* divs.

I feel like there have been cases when I've added them on purpose, but I suppose I could do most of that in HTML cards. To turn the question back to you: do you think these blank divs are messy enough to warrant the work (and extra processing in the cleaning process) to get rid of them?

(The reason it's extra work is that the current cleaner only looks at allowed individual tags and attributes -- it doesn't look at tag structures, like divs within divs.)

I think so far I'm a weak vote for "fuggitfernau".

  --Ethan McCutchen.....Tue Nov 16 09:20:25 -0800 2010

I'm fine with that. It's really a separate ticket or two, see remove attribute-less spans.

  --John Abbe.....Fri Feb 11 21:24:12 -0800 2011