こんにちはTAG!

I'm requesting a TAG review of:

• Name: Raw Clipboard Access API
• Specification URL: https://w3c.github.io/clipboard-apis/ (Note that this API's contents are not yet in this spec, but this spec is where it will end up)
• Explainer (containing user needs and example code)¹: https://github.com/dway123/raw-clipboard-access/blob/master/explainer.md
• GitHub issues (if you prefer feedback filed there): https://github.com/dway123/raw-clipboard-access/issues
• Tests: TBD (directory will be https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/tree/master/clipboard-apis)
• Primary contacts (and their relationship to the specification): @dway123

Further details:

• Relevant time constraints or deadlines: We'd like to discuss this at TPAC (Sept 16, 2019), so getting TAG review in early Sept before TPAC would be great, so that we can iterate before TPAC. We also plan to Origin Trial M79 Oct 17, 2019.
• I have read and filled out the Self-Review Questionnare on Security and Privacy. The assessment is here.
• I have reviewed the TAG's API Design Principles
• The group where the work on this specification is: Editing TF

We recommend the explainer to be in Markdown. On top of the usual information expected in the explainer, it is strongly recommended to add:

• Links to major pieces of multi-stakeholder review or discussion of this specification:
• Links to major unresolved issues or opposition with this specification:

You should also know that...

The previous TAG review for the Async Clipboard API, which this is built on is here.

We'd prefer the TAG provide feedback as (please select one):

• open issues in our GitHub repo for each point of feedback
• open a single issue in our GitHub repo for the entire review
• leave review feedback as a comment in this issue and @-notify [github usernames]

Please preview the issue and check that the links work before submitting. In particular, if anything links to a URL which requires authentication (e.g. Google document), please make sure anyone with the link can access the document.

¹ For background, see our explanation of how to write a good explainer.