- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 18:21:57 +0000
- To: public-webapps@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22059
Travis Leithead [MSFT] <travil@microsoft.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED |---
--- Comment #2 from Travis Leithead [MSFT] <travil@microsoft.com> ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> As suggested by James Su, I'd like to incorporate composition dictionary
> within InputMethodContext.
>
> It would look like:
> interface InputMethodContext {
> ...
> readonly attribute DOMString text;
The interface is labelled "InputMethodContext" and so "text" is a little
ambiguous in my opinion. I liked "compositionText" better, but I could be OK
with this.
> readonly attribute long selectionStart;
> readonly attribute long selectionEnd;
Selection & composition are two completely different underlying concepts that
shouldn’t be combined. I think calling these "selection.." is confusing with
normal text selection. The currently selected text will already be available
via the input and textarea's selection properties--no need to duplicate the
functionality. Offset (in the MS proposal) makes it clear that it’s character
positions and not DOM nodes. These offset character positions mark the actual
"active" composition range (which may be different from what is currently
selected). Maybe for brevity: "startOffset"/ "endOffset"? or
"textContentStart"/"textContentEnd"?
> readonly attribute Uint32Array segments;
OK. This is not relevant to all IMEs though. I suppose we could implement this
for other IMEs by always returning only 1 segment.
> where selectionStart/End means identical to that for <input>/<textarea>,
> and added segments information for dividing the text into clauses.
No need for the redundancy. What we found is that we actually needed the
"active" composition offsets, not the selected text which varies depending on
the state of the IME. See above.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 20 August 2013 18:22:00 UTC