W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: "keyIdentifier" Sucks

From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 00:34:00 -0400
Message-ID: <4AB853B8.9050603@w3.org>
To: "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
Hi, Sean-

Sean Hogan wrote (on 9/22/09 12:13 AM):
>
> Doug Schepers wrote:
>>
>> Here are some counter-proposals, in roughly descending order of my
>> preference:
>> 1) keyname (I'd need to come up with some other term for what I'm
>> calling a "key name" in the spec, but that's fine)
>> 2) keystring
>> 3) keyvalue
>> 4) keyaddress
>> 5) keyid (I don't like this one for a number of reasons)
>> 6) keypeek (joke)
>>
> The XBL spec uses "key" for event filtering. Seems okay to me.

Too general.  When you're describing the feature, you need a more 
specific hook.  Just saying "key" doesn't distinguish it from a physical 
key, keyCode/charCode, a VK, or even a scancode.

Regards-
-Doug Schepers
W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs
Received on Tuesday, 22 September 2009 04:34:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:14:03 GMT