W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-core@w3.org > January to March 2009

RE: [ACTION-47] Re: [XHTMLAccess] i18n comment 2: Keycode or character

From: Phillips, Addison <addison@amazon.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 07:44:30 -0700
To: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>, "ishida@w3.org" <ishida@w3.org>, "www-html-editor@w3.org" <www-html-editor@w3.org>, "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
CC: XHTML WG <public-xhtml2@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4D25F22093241741BC1D0EEBC2DBB1DA019E622EBD@EX-SEA5-D.ant.amazon.com>
Hi Steven,

We're okay with this resolution.

Addison (for I18N)

Addison Phillips
Globalization Architect -- Lab126

Internationalization is not a feature.
It is an architecture.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Pemberton [mailto:steven.pemberton@cwi.nl]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 7:40 AM
> To: Steven Pemberton; Phillips, Addison; ishida@w3.org; www-html-
> editor@w3.org; public-i18n-core@w3.org
> Cc: XHTML WG
> Subject: [ACTION-47] Re: [XHTMLAccess] i18n comment 2: Keycode or
> character
> 
> Hi Addison,
> 
> We would really like to move forward on this.
> 
> So are you OK with the reasoning on the choice of the attribute
> name, and
> the wording suggested by Gregory?
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2009JanMar/0009

> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Steven
> 
> So are you
> On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 21:07:52 +0100, Steven Pemberton
> <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 20:26:32 +0100, Phillips, Addison
> > <addison@amazon.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I'm not sure I buy the reasoning given here. I agree that the
> name
> >> 'key' might be too suggestive... except that the whole idea of
> the
> >> <access> element is to provide accessibility via a keyboard-key
> >> sequence mapping.
> >
> > That is not the idea at all.  The idea is to identify the access
> points.
> > You'll note that the key attribute is  optional. There may not
> even be a
> > keyboard.
> >
> >> I'm not sure that obscuring this by renaming the attribute is
> that
> >> useful and personally I'm more concerned about what we say
> around the
> >> element than with just the attribute name. Does XHTML-WG have a
> problem
> >> with our suggested text?
> >
> > Well, since it was predicated on keyboard keys producing
> characters,
> > yes! We don't mind including text that gives hints about mapping
> > keyboard-produced keys to access mappings, but we don't want
> people
> > reading it thinking that we are talking principally about
> keyboards. The
> > text starts with explicit text that says that, but apparently
> that's not
> > enough.
> > Best wishes,
> >
> > Steven
> >
> >>
> >> Best Regards,
> >>
> >> Addison
> >>
> >> Addison Phillips
> >> Globalization Architect -- Lab126
> >>
> >> Internationalization is not a feature.
> >> It is an architecture.
> >>
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Steven Pemberton [mailto:steven.pemberton@cwi.nl]
> >>> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 11:00 AM
> >>> To: Phillips, Addison; ishida@w3.org; www-html-editor@w3.org;
> >>> public-i18n-core@w3.org
> >>> Cc: XHTML WG
> >>> Subject: Re: [XHTMLAccess] i18n comment 2: Keycode or character
> >>>
> >>> Hello Addison,
> >>>
> >>> We discussed this at a recent call, and came to the conclusion
> was
> >>> that
> >>> the mismatch here was caused by the choice of the attribute
> "key".
> >>> We only
> >>> chose this name because it was close to the current HTML
> attribute
> >>> name,
> >>> but we decided it was a poor choice because it suggests
> something
> >>> different to what was intended.
> >>>
> >>> Namely, there is no requirement that the thing contained in the
> >>> attribute
> >>> called "key" have anything to do with a keyboard. It is more
> meant
> >>> to be
> >>> like the key to a table mapping. How the key to that mapping is
> >>> generated
> >>> is implementation dependent.
> >>>
> >>> So we think that the best thing would be to rename this
> attribute
> >>> to
> >>> remove the ambiguity.
> >>>
> >>> We thought of such names as:
> >>>
> >>> 	<access map="c" targetid="contents" />
> >>> 	<access code="c" targetid="contents" />
> >>> 	<access shortcut="c" targetid="contents" />
> >>> 	<access use="c" targetid="contents" />
> >>>
> >>> Maybe you can think of something better, or choose a preferred
> one
> >>> from
> >>> this list.
> >>>
> >>> Best wishes,
> >>>
> >>> Steven Pemberton
> >>> For the XHTML2 WG
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:34:00 +0100, Phillips, Addison
> >>> <addison@amazon.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > Hi Steven and HTML WG,
> >>> >
> >>> > This note is on behalf of the Internationalization Core WG.
> >>> >
> >>> > We recently received your responses to our comments on the
> XHTML
> >>> Access
> >>> > Module and we reviewed them at a recent teleconference [1].
> While
> >>> some
> >>> > progress has been made, we're still not entirely satisfied
> with
> >>> the
> >>> > results. Our focus is on Section 3.1.2 [2].
> >>> >
> >>> > We recognize that this is a difficult problem in part because
> it
> >>> hasn't
> >>> > been solved in a consistently recognized "best practices"
> manner:
> >>> > different platforms and operating environments have taken
> >>> different
> >>> > approaches whose details vary when dealing with keyboard
> events
> >>> and
> >>> > such. Notably, we've been engaged with the folks working on
> DOM
> >>> Events
> >>> > as they struggle with similar issues. (Which is why one sees
> the
> >>> text
> >>> > one does in [3]!!)
> >>> >
> >>> > One of the main problems here is that there is often a
> difference
> >>> > between the "key codes" produced by key events (key up, key
> down,
> >>> etc.)
> >>> > and the "char codes" that result from various key presses
> (i.e.
> >>> "key
> >>> > typed" events). Try out [4] with different keyboard layouts,
> for
> >>> example.
> >>> >
> >>> > Comments on the current text follow:
> >>> >
> >>> > <q>
> >>> > This attribute assigns a key mapping to an access shortcut.
> An
> >>> access
> >>> > key is a single character from the document character set.
> >>> > </q>
> >>> >
> >>> > This might not be the way to express this. Some visual
> characters
> >>> are
> >>> > composed of more than one code point. Some physical keys on
> >>> keyboards
> >>> > produce multiple characters (or no visual characters at all).
> And
> >>> so
> >>> > forth. Linking the characters to the document's character set
> is
> >>> > probably not a good idea either (unless by "document
> character
> >>> set" you
> >>> > mean X(HT)ML's character set, which is Unicode). It might be
> >>> better to
> >>> > say something like:
> >>> >
> >>> > <q>
> >>> > This attribute assigns a key mapping to an access shortcut.
> The
> >>> key
> >>> > mapping consists of a single Unicode code point (character).
> >>> Typically
> >>> > the key mapping is expected to be accessible to the user via
> a
> >>> single
> >>> > keystroke, although activating it might involve pressing or
> >>> holding down
> >>> > multiple keys. The invocation of access keys depends on the
> >>> > implementation. For instance, on some systems one may have to
> >>> press an
> >>> > "alt" or "cmd" key in addition to the access key.
> >>> >
> >>> > Authors are cautioned that not all characters are appropriate
> as
> >>> access
> >>> > key values, since they cannot be accessed directly from the
> >>> keyboard.
> >>> > Other characters only appear when combined with base
> characters.
> >>> > Examples of these might include combining vowels or tone
> marks,
> >>> such as
> >>> > used in Arabic, Southeast Asian, or Indic scripts. These are
> more
> >>> > difficult to communicate to users because, while they can
> often
> >>> be typed
> >>> > independently, they are not typically displayed independently
> and
> >>> the
> >>> > user might not know which character is intended as the key
> >>> mapping.
> >>> > Finally, any key available on one keyboard might not be
> available
> >>> on a
> >>> > different keyboard layout.
> >>> > </q>
> >>> >
> >>> > Later the text says:
> >>> >
> >>> > <q>The character assigned to a key, and its relationship to a
> >>> role or id
> >>> > attribute SHOULD be treated as an author suggestion. </q>
> >>> >
> >>> > This should probably say: "The key mapping and its..." or
> >>> possibly "The
> >>> > key attribute and its..."
> >>> >
> >>> > In the remainder of this section, the phrases "key
> assignment",
> >>> "key",
> >>> > "assignment", "key binding", etc. are used to mean the key
> >>> attribute
> >>> > value, which, in turn, means a character (because the
> attribute
> >>> value is
> >>> > defined to be a Unicode code point).
> >>> >
> >>> > Ultimately, we think you're on the right track here. The
> >>> > Internationalization working group would be happy to review
> text
> >>> or work
> >>> > with your WG in some other way to help resolve these issues.
> >>> >
> >>> > Kind regards,
> >>> >
> >>> > Addison (for I18N Core)
> >>> >
> >>> > [1] http://www.w3.org/2008/11/26-core-minutes.html#item06

> >>> > [2] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/WD-xhtml-access-

> >>> 20080526/#sec_3.1.2.
> >>> >     [a] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xhtml-access-

> >>> 20081023/#A_key
> >>> > [3]
> >>> > http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-2-Events/events.html#Events-

> >>> eventgroupings-keyevents
> >>> > [4] http://rishida.net/utils/keyevents/index.html

> >>> >
> >>> > Addison Phillips
> >>> > Globalization Architect -- Lab126
> >>> >
> >>> > Internationalization is not a feature.
> >>> > It is an architecture.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >> -----Original Message-----
> >>> >> From: public-i18n-core-request@w3.org [mailto:public-i18n-
> core-
> >>> >> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Phillips, Addison
> >>> >> Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 7:28 AM
> >>> >> To: Steven Pemberton; ishida@w3.org; www-html-editor@w3.org;
> >>> >> public-i18n-core@w3.org
> >>> >> Subject: RE: [XHTMLAccess] i18n comment 2: Keycode or
> character
> >>> >>
> >>> >> (personal response)
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I think this text moves in the right direction, but think
> that
> >>> >> there may still be problems with it. Mainly, I think it is
> now
> >>> >> unclear how the 'key' attribute is supposed to work, given
> that
> >>> the
> >>> >> word key is both disclaimed and also used to mean (or at
> least
> >>> >> imply) actual keypresses.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> It should be noted that there is not a well-defined solution
> to
> >>> >> this problem. WebAPI has been struggling with this also. In
> >>> >> practice, how physical key events and character input are
> >>> related
> >>> >> is normally handled at a fairly low level in the system.
> Higher
> >>> >> level software that attempts to listen and respond to key
> press
> >>> >> events often ends up damaging or disabling more complex
> input
> >>> >> systems, such as the IMEs (input method editors) used to
> compose
> >>> >> e.g. East Asian text.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> (chair hat ON)
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thanks for the response. The I18N WG will review your
> response
> >>> and
> >>> >> text in detail. Our next teleconference is today.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Addison
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Addison Phillips
> >>> >> Globalization Architect -- Lab126
> >>> >> Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Internationalization is not a feature.
> >>> >> It is an architecture.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >>> >> > From: public-i18n-core-request@w3.org [mailto:public-i18n-
> >>> core-
> >>> >> > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Steven Pemberton
> >>> >> > Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 6:46 AM
> >>> >> > To: ishida@w3.org; www-html-editor@w3.org; public-i18n-
> >>> >> core@w3.org
> >>> >> > Subject: Re: [XHTMLAccess] i18n comment 2: Keycode or
> >>> character
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Thanks.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > We have tried to address this by making certain that
> people
> >>> >> > understand
> >>> >> > that "key" is
> >>> >> >    an abstraction and does not correlate to a "key code".
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Please see the latest editor's draft for full details.
> >>> >> > http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-xhtml-access-20081023/

> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Best wishes,
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Steven Pemberton
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > On Wed, 06 Aug 2008 09:12:28 +0200, <ishida@w3.org> wrote:
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > Comment from the i18n review of:
> >>> >> > > http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/WD-xhtml-access-20080526/

> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > Comment 2
> >>> >> > > At
> >>> >> > > http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0806-xhtml-

> >>> >> > access/Overview.html
> >>> >> > > Editorial/substantive: S
> >>> >> > > Tracked by: RI
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > Location in reviewed document:
> >>> >> > > 3.1.2
> >>> >> > > [http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/WD-xhtml-access-

> >>> >> > 20080526/#sec_3.1.2.]
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > Comment:
> >>> >> > > It isn't clear that this section has taken into account
> the
> >>> >> > potential
> >>> >> > > difference between key codes and the characters that may
> >>> result
> >>> >> > from a
> >>> >> > > key press on a given keyboard. It seems to assume that
> the
> >>> >> > character on
> >>> >> > > a key cap == the key code identifier == the character
> >>> produced
> >>> >> by
> >>> >> > > pressing that key == the character that is the value of
> the
> >>> key
> >>> >> > > attribute.
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > This is not always the case when you take into account a
> >>> >> variety
> >>> >> > of
> >>> >> > > keyboards serving various different locales.
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > Please provide some precision as to how a key attribute
> >>> value
> >>> >> is
> >>> >> > > associated with keyboard events. (Note that this has
> proved
> >>> to
> >>> >> be
> >>> >> > a
> >>> >> > > difficult topic for the specification of DOM3 keyboard
> >>> events.)
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >
> 

Received on Wednesday, 11 March 2009 14:45:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 11 March 2009 14:45:24 GMT