From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Question about copy-region-as-kill
Date: 09 Apr 2002 22:24:10 +0900
Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
Message-ID: <87sn65m2dh.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp>
References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1020409140122.12380B-100000@is>
	<buoit71i31n.fsf@mcspd15.ucom.lsi.nec.co.jp>
	<5xu1qlkonv.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk>
Reply-To: Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1018359391 17378 127.0.0.1 (9 Apr 2002 13:36:31 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 13:36:31 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>, John Wiegley <johnw@gnu.org>,
	emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian))
	id 16uvnT-0004WB-00
	for <emacs-devel@main.gmane.org>; Tue, 09 Apr 2002 15:36:31 +0200
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 16uw2J-0003Se-00
	for <emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org>; Tue, 09 Apr 2002 15:51:51 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian))
	id 16uvnC-0000b5-00; Tue, 09 Apr 2002 09:36:14 -0400
Original-Received: from smtp01.fields.gol.com ([203.216.5.131])
	by fencepost.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian))
	id 16uvll-0000UH-00; Tue, 09 Apr 2002 09:34:45 -0400
Original-Received: from tc-2-168.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp ([203.216.25.168] helo=tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp)
	by smtp01.fields.gol.com with esmtp (Magnetic Fields)
	id 16uvli-0000VO-00; Tue, 09 Apr 2002 22:34:42 +0900
Original-Received: by tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 402373057; Tue,  9 Apr 2002 22:24:11 +0900 (JST)
Original-To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm)
System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu
In-Reply-To: <5xu1qlkonv.fsf@kfs2.cua.dk>
Original-Lines: 18
X-Abuse-Complaints: abuse@gol.com
Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Emacs development discussions. <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel/>
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:2490
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:2490

storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes:
> > I think many people may prefer the text-property programming interface
> > anyway.  Anyway, yeah, it does make sense -- consider a form: it's
> > generally thought of as read-only with read/write fields in it.
> 
> I think using read-only property for this is perfectly valid, but still,
> if you copy the form (or part of it) to another buffer, I guess it really
> doesn't make sense to regard it as a form anymore.

I agree that read-only (and mouse-face &c) properties are annoying when
copied, and I'd be quite happy if they never were; I was just arguing
that _conceptually_, they really are `part of the text', not something
independent overlayed on top of it.

-Miles

-- 
Run away!  Run away!