Some Eclipse Foundation services are deprecated, or will be soon. Please ensure you've read this important communication.
Bug 320442 - [Help] Allow a true deletion of content in XHTML files
Summary: [Help] Allow a true deletion of content in XHTML files
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Platform
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: User Assistance (show other bugs)
Version: 3.6   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 enhancement (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: platform-ua-inbox CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-07-20 16:47 EDT by Ben Margolis CLA
Modified: 2019-09-06 16:06 EDT (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Ben Margolis CLA 2010-07-20 16:47:47 EDT
Build Identifier: 3.6

Background:  Eclipse dynamic content lets you replace a tag with a blank tag:  

from <p id="old">hello</p> 

to <p id="blank"/> or to <anchor id="blank"/>.

This replacement could be problematic; first, because someone might add the blank <p/> without caring about the effect on the formatting of the page; and second, because a likely use would be to always use a replacement tag with the same ID. (You've stored your "blank" tag in one file, and you use it over and over again.)  

Given that the dynamically updated HTML is an input to a print function, it could be an input to any other code.  Couldn't the duplicate IDs be problematic?

If only for elegance, Eclipse should allow deletion of tags, not just a replacement with other tags.  No such capability is now available, and no existing usage will break.

You might say, "If you are going to delete content directly, why not allow substitution of content directly, instead of through a wiring file"?  That change doesn't seem so important, and the wiring file provides indirection, which is often characteristic of a good design.

Reproducible: Always
Comment 1 Eclipse Webmaster CLA 2019-09-06 16:06:33 EDT
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet.

If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant.