W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: IME events

From: Masayuki Nakano <masayuki@d-toybox.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:57:13 +0900
Message-ID: <4A499B29.8020201@d-toybox.com>
To: Takuya Oikawa <takuya@google.com>
CC: Daniel Danilatos <daniel@danilatos.com>, Olli Pettay <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, www-dom@w3.org, hbono@chromium.org
Sorry for the delay.

On 2009/06/23 9:31, Takuya Oikawa wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 1:51 AM, Masayuki Nakano <masayuki@d-toybox.com
> <mailto:masayuki@d-toybox.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 2009/06/18 19:11, Takuya Oikawa wrote:
>
>         On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Masayuki
>         Nakano<masayuki@d-toybox.com <mailto:masayuki@d-toybox.com>>  wrote:
>
>
>             On 2009/06/15 13:52, Daniel Danilatos wrote:
>
>
>                 IME API
>
>                 * Control the IME Candidate window (get/set position,
>                 ability to prevent
>                 it from showing up at all, etc)
>
>
>             Applications cannot control the candidate window position
>             via TSF, probably. However, if browsers implement to render
>             the candidate window themselves, we can. But gecko doesn't
>             have such plan. Because most users don't happy. The
>             candidate window should have native looks of the IME.
>
>
>         Yes, it's true.  TSF's UIless mode
>         (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa966970.aspx) provides you
>         to disable the candidate window.  So, the browsers can implement to
>         render the candidate window themselves.
>
>         For most of the cases, as you said, there is not so strong need to
>         have browsers render the candidate window.  However, if the browsers
>         also have the function to control the candidate window and its
>         function is published as JavaScript to Web applications, Web
>         applications may use it.  For example, as some might have already
>         pointed out, Search suggest (i.e. Google Suggest or Yahoo! Suggest)
>         cannot handle the conflict of UI (overwrapping UIs of the suggest
>         window and IME's candidate window) now, but if Browsers' JavaScript
>         can control the behavior, they will probably use it.
>
>
>     The candidate window is not just a list of the candidate strings at
>     ATOK. ATOK gives some advices of the selected word to the users. And
>     also users can access to the word meaning of dictionaries. So, I
>     think that the Web App developers should not kill such IME features.
>
>
> I know.  MS-IME also has such features (annotations, usage/meanings,
> etc.).  However, the most basic feature that all IMEs should have is the
> Japanese conversion.  I don't say that Web Apps can kill those
> additional/rich functions.  What I want to say is that it would be
> better to have Web Apps (via Browsers) control the behavior of IME
> including the control of the position of the candidate window or even
> enabling/disabling the candidate window.  If we have such features, even
> in the worst case that we don't have any other solutions, Web Apps can
> still give users the Japanese conversion candidates and unconflicting
> UI.  This is my intention behind this proposal.

I meant, if we want to control the candidate window position under TSF, 
don't we need to draw the the candidate window by ourselves? If so, we 
may not be able to provide the advanced features, right? And also the 
feature chooses the Web App usable OS/environment. Maybe, we cannot 
specify the candidate window position on Cocoa, so, it means that the 
such Web apps can be unusable/unuseful on Mac.

>         Or, as TSF's UIless mode is mostly used by game titles, if web-based
>         (browser-based) applications become popular, they also would like to
>         disable the IME's candidate window.
>
>
>     I'm not sure that it makes the users happy. Do the users input
>     comfortable without IME's candidate window?
>
>
> For such limited scenario, users seem happy as their main goal is to
> play game titles where it's very rare to have richer functionalities of
> IMEs.  What they need to do with IMEs is to type Japanese.

The users wanted to input some CJK text via the IME, right? At that 
time, are the users really happy by the candidate window to be disabled? 
Isn't the disabling the candidate window wanted only by the game designers?

I think the candidate window isn't a part of applications. It is a part 
of the system. E.g., IMEs on Cocoa and TSF decide the position of the 
candidate window from the caret position or composition string rect.

I feel that this means IMEs don't want to be touched to their UI from 
applications.

NOTE: I think the limitations of each major platforms (the list can 
include some misunderstandings)

* IMM32
  - ImmSetCandidateWindow can specify the candidate window position.
  - Can hide the candidate window at WM_IME_SETCONTEXT message (i.e., 
cannot hide it dynamically (?))

* TSF
  - Cannot control the candidate window position under non-UIless mode.
  - Cannot hide the candidate window under non-UIless mode.
  - UIless mode might not be supported by some TIPs.
  - Can hide the candidate window under UIless mode.
  - Cannot control the TIP's candidate window position under UIless 
mode. (?)
  - Can control the candidate window position if a browser renders the 
candidate window itself, but some advanced features may not be able to 
be supported at this time. (?)

* GTK2
  - gtk_im_context_set_cursor_location can control the candidate window 
position.
  - Cannot hide the candidate window. (?)

* Cocoa (including Input Method Kit Framework, supported 10.5 and later)
  - Cannot control the candidate window position.
  - Cannot hide the candidate window.

>             And also we cannot control it on Cocoa, probably. Cocoa
>             applications should implement |firstRectForCharacterRange|
>             of NSTextInput protocol. And IMEs can decide the candidate
>             window position by its result.
>
>
>         I'm not sure the implementation of Cocoa.  What I discussed with
>         Daniel was that we should consider both short-term solution and
>         long-term solution.  For the latter, we should involve platform/OS
>         developers who are responsible for input framework and browser
>         vendors
>         to discuss the use cases and solutions.  We are aware that it takes
>         long.
>
>
>     Right.
>
>     Basically, I believe that we should not limit/change the behavior of
>     IMEs more than the *users* needed. There are many IMEs, IME
>     frameworks, OSs and devices. I think that some IME APIs for web
>     applications cannot support on some environments that includes new
>     products that will be coming in the future. Web applications should
>     not choose the environments by the IME management.
>
>
> Agreed. That's why I think we need to have some consensus or standard
> for all of these different layers even though it takes long.  I think
> it's okay to have Web Apps control the behavior of IMEs because local
> applications can do today.  Of course, having such functionalities in
> Web Apps (via Browsers) don't mean that it's recommended.  However, for
> some scenarios which controlling the IMEs' behaviors is the only option,
> we should have any means, I think.

-- 
Masayuki Nakano <masayuki@d-toybox.com>
Manager, Internationalization, Mozilla Japan.
Received on Tuesday, 30 June 2009 04:59:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:14:00 GMT