[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Question about copy-region-as-kill

From: Kim F. Storm
Subject: Re: Question about copy-region-as-kill
Date: 11 Apr 2002 18:27:55 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2.50

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

>     Again, it depends...  E.g. if we enhance RMAIL to show small icons
>     for unread or urgent messages (or whatever), we don't want to copy
>     those images -- but if a mail message contains an image, we would
>     (probably) want to copy that (as an image).
> "Enhance RMAIL to show icons" is not a clear  description of a scenario.
> Where would these icons go?  In which buffer?

It might use an image property to show an icon _instead_ of a MIME attachment.
Now, if you copy the message to another buffer, do you want to still _see_
the icon instead of the MIME attachment, or do you want to see the "raw" text?

There may also be a mouse action associated with the icon, causing the MIME
attachment to be expanded (or saved or whatever).

I guess, it again depends on what the target buffer is.  If you are composing
a new message, it would make sense to just see the icon for the attachment,
but for other purposes, that may not be what you want...

>     Can't think of any, but I suppose there will be those 10% of special
>     cases which will never fit (entirely) into a specific category.
> Talking about the possibility of unknown whatever does not help
> sharpen the analysis.  Are there any interesting cases that you can
> think of now?

No, but images are a good example of something which may be problematic, e.g.
it does make sense to copy images between "document" buffers or mail buffers,
but not into a C or lisp buffer.

However, as I tried to explain, some images (e.g. a picture of my cat)
may be "true" images (which are part of the text/document), and other
images may be added by emacs lisp code (e.g. an icon for an attachment).

So I don't think you can make a general rule which will cover both.

>     But what about (also) having a user command:
>           yank-without-properties
> I dislike it very much.  It is far better to have a convenient
> way to clear out text properties from the region.

I dislike it too, but at least it gives the user the final word!

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]