W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2014

RE: [clipboard events] click-to-copy support could be hasFeature discoverable?

From: Ben Peters <Ben.Peters@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 21:01:46 +0000
To: "Hallvord R. M. Steen" <hsteen@mozilla.com>
CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <2e88c71dede3487a912bca32c1602c05@BLUPR03MB437.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
> >>> I wonder how fancy we can get with execCommand()'s value argument?
> >>> Could we go for something like this instead of the scripted event payload?
> >>>
> >>> document.execCommand('copy', false, {'text/plain':'Hello',
> >>> 'text/html':'<p><b>Hello</b></p>'});?
> 
> I think
> document.execCommand('copy', false, {'dataType':'text/plain', 'data':'Hello'})
> will do. Authors who need more fancy options than that can listen for the
> copy event and use setData() to push other formats.
> 
> I quite like that. I think I might just try to spec it and throw out the scripted-
> event-has-real-effects idea. It might even come with a better
> discovery/fallback story: if the document.execCommand() call throws, create
> a TEXTAREA (or DIV with contentEditable set), throw in the data you want to
> put on the clipboard, and select it. Then call execCommand() again without
> fancy arguments, or tell users to press ctrl-c. Or something. The point is that
> execCommand() AFAIK is expected to throw exceptions.

execCommand throws in older versions of IE, but just returns false if it doesn’t work in newer browsers (IE11, Chrome, FF), which is the same as saying the command failed.

> >> Maybe, or we could propose a new API.
> 
> > I've been thinking about this too. I like the idea here. Another one
> > would be to have a Command object, like this:
> > document.execCommand({'commandName':'copy', 'text/plain':'Hello',
> > 'text/html':'<p><b>Hello</b></p>'});
> 
> I like the direction of your Command proposals, but in this case I think adding
> a {'commandName':'foo'} construct where just 'foo' would do fine earlier
> complicates more than it simplifies. ;-)
 
> > Which means we could get rid of the nearly-meaningless second argument
> > to execCommand without needing to introduce a new function.
>
> Does any UA actually do something different if the second argument is not
> "false"? IE? If this is implemented precisely nowhere I'd simply attempt to
> redefine the second argument :-p but IANASL (just invented alternative to
> IANAL - S reads Spec..) -Hallvord

Yes, IE supports the second argument for "createLink" at least. We could still redefine it though:

document.execCommand('copy', {'text/plain':'Hello', 'text/html':'<p><b>Hello</b></p>'});

And 'showui' could just be another property of the object if it's needed. Simple enough to just check for true, false, or an object.

Received on Tuesday, 20 May 2014 21:02:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:14:24 UTC