Skip to content

Outline RFC 46: Single paragraph rich text fields/blocks #46

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 21, 2022
Merged

Outline RFC 46: Single paragraph rich text fields/blocks #46

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
24 changes: 24 additions & 0 deletions text/046-simple-rich-text.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
# Outline RFC 46: Rich text segment blocks

* RFC: 46
* Authors: Karl Hobley
* Created: 2019-11-18
* Last Modified: 2019-11-18

## Abstract

This is an outline proposal for a new field and block type which would behave like a ``RichTextField``/``RichTextBlock`` but only allows a single segment of text.

Inline elements such as formatting and hyperlinks may be allowed. But block elements like paragraphs, images and bullet points will not. The HTML segment in the database will not be enclosed in a `<p>` tag giving developers more flexibility in where it can be used.

I think this will be very useful for:
- Introductions/summaries which can usually only be one paragraph but use rich text fields as they may need inline formatting. For example, the sentence above "Tom Dyson" in https://wagtail.io/blog/wagtail-2-7/.
- Image captions
- Inline styling in titles. For example https://torchbox.com/digital-products/
- Forcing editors to use separate rich text blocks in streamfields

I think it would also be very useful to have an internal ``RichTextSegment`` type to represent the values of these fields. Having a separate type rather than reusing ``RichText`` would be useful because logic, like diffing and translating, would work very differently when working with individual segments.

## Specification

I don't think this would be a very technically challenging change to make, but I'm leaving this bit out since I'm only looking to get feedback on the general idea for now.