- From: Matthew Thomas <mpt@myrealbox.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 19:10:51 -0500
On 23 Feb, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Matthew Raymond wrote: > ... > So you see, if we want to establish a GUI selection interface for > DOM/Javascript, we can use DOM Range as PART of the interface, but we > still have to define some way of getting the current selection and > setting the user selection. I'm thinking something like this: > > | var myRange = document.getSelection(); That seems harmless ... > The above gets the current selection within the document. If the > document doesn't have a selection, it returns document.createRange(). > Similarly, there will be a setSelection method: > > | document.setSelection(myRange); > > If you wish to deselect everything in the document, you could do > the following: > > | document.removeSelection(); > ... .... But those two, unfortunately, seem more likely to be abused than usefully used. Annoying authors would repeatedly clear any selection in a misguided attempt to prevent people from copying text, more often than application authors would use those functions for legitimate purposes. (Yes, you could work around this by turning off JavaScript, but that would work only for the small proportion of users who understand what's causing the problem.) I know that authors can be annoying no matter what you give them (for example, displaying text as graphics), but I think this would make being annoying far too easy. -- Matthew Thomas http://mpt.net.nz/
Received on Wednesday, 23 February 2005 16:10:51 UTC