- From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 12:19:09 +0100
- To: "Hallvord R. M. Steen" <hsteen@mozilla.com>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- CC: www-archive@w3.org, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 27/02/2014 09:57 , Hallvord R. M. Steen wrote: > I think so, yes - though I may not have Anolis set up on any computer > I'm carrying right now, so only if somebody else can run Anolis for > me.. (I'm back home in one month or so, so I could presumably get the > draft pubready all by myself then. I guess I could also add the > cross-references manually for such a small spec..). Are you sure it's an Anolis spec? :) > I'll look at this a bit, but I don't think the differences between a > v.1 and v.2 would make much sense from an editing point of view. I'd > be more inclined to call the spec "feature complete" at some point > even though it may have to wait a few years for implementations to > catch up before being officially blessed.. -Hallvord I've been wondering if there isn't something we could do here to speed things up a bit for the common case. The general-purpose API definitely remains useful, but by far the majority use case is to just copy something, usually just text. There are still lots of sites out there that use Flash for the sole purpose of putting some plain text in the clipboard. I was therefore wondering if we couldn't just add a copy() method to the Selection object (or maybe Range), define it as doing whatever the browser does when the copy operation is invoke with that given selection, and ship. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Friday, 28 February 2014 11:19:20 UTC