How is EditorWidget width not an issue?

[twMat]

Instead of posting this as an issue, I'll ask how it is not considered an issue already and if there is no satisfactory answer, I will post it as one. Thus:

<$edit-text tiddler=HelloThere/> or <$edit-text tiddler=HelloThere size=100000 /> both show up as

1. Why is the editor not 100% width (just like the editor in edit mode?)
2. Why does the editor have that arbitrary width?
3. Why doesn't size do anything?
4. What is a user supposed to do if he doesn't know CSS to define some class to it?

If this were an issue request, I'd propose that

1. default width is 100%
2. there's some parameter to set width for the textareas

According to docs, the size property refers to "The size of the input field (in characters)". It is unclear if this means "total number of characters" in the editor or if it means "width" because the property can only be used in single line editors where it practically only affects the width. I have never had use of "total number of characters" so I think a property for width does make sense, whether this is really what size means or whether there is need to introduce a new width parameter.

[pmario]

There are a lot of parameters. I'd try to set them. https://tiddlywiki.com/#EditTextWidget

size .. probably is for tag=input and not tag=textarea

<$edit-text tiddler=HelloThere class="tc-edit-texteditor tc-edit-texteditor-body" autoHeight=no />

Works just fine. BUT the autoHeight activates the height setting from the editmode. ... So there's probably a CSS specificity problem.

[twMat]

Thanks @pmario

size .. probably is for tag=input and not tag=textarea

OK, so should be stated in the docs. I'll review it.

<$edit-text tiddler=HelloThere class="tc-edit-texteditor tc-edit-texteditor-body" autoHeight=no />

Thanks, AFAICT it seems to be enough with:

<$edit-text tiddler=HelloThere class="tc-edit-texteditor" />

So, this example should also be in the docs. It also solves the autoHeight in your example.

But why should 100% width not be the default? What justifies the current magic width?

[Jermolene]

But why should 100% width not be the default? What justifies the current magic width?

A plain, unadorned edit-text widget with tag set to "textarea" is rendered as a plain HTML textarea element with no special styling. If we applied a default class or set of styles then we'd need to provide a way to disable them because they wouldn't be appropriate in all cases.

[twMat]

[...] rendered as a plain HTML textarea element

Fair enuff. I still wonder what the magic default width does come from but I guess that's a question for the W3C or something.

[pmario]

It also solves the autoHeight in your example.

I think autoHeight should be set to "yes" =auto by default

[twMat]

I think autoHeight should be set to "yes" =auto by default

autoHeight=yes is default, according to the docs. If that is what you refer to.