- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 20:35:28 -0400
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, ashok.malhotra@oracle.com, Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On Fri, 2010-06-04 at 19:27 -0700, L. David Baron wrote: [ . . . ] > The ability to manipulate what a user is copying is also important > for applications on the Web. If you're using a Web app like Google > Docs, you want copy to copy a useful representation, not the > internal representation that the editor uses. But it is the *browser* that renders things like HTML, plain text, PDF, etc. -- not javascript. Why should javascript be given the ability to mess with it *after* the user has selected and told the browser to *copy* it? When I tell my browser to copy, I expect my browser to *copy* -- not copy-and-adulterate-under-web-site-control. When I paste, whatever I copied may be converted to the destination format for compatibility, but that's a different issue. -- David Booth, Ph.D. Cleveland Clinic (contractor) Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Cleveland Clinic.
Received on Thursday, 10 June 2010 00:35:57 UTC