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

Re: convertKeyIdentifier

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:34:07 +0200
To: "Doug Schepers" <schepers@w3.org>, "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.u0nz65yf64w2qv@annevk-t60>
On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:10:27 +0200, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org> wrote:
> Please change the subject line if you change the subject...

I thought both items were in scope for the subject. Sorry.

> Anne van Kesteren wrote (on 9/22/09 10:51 AM):
>> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 16:48:19 +0200, Travis Leithead
>> <travil@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>> [*]Unicode (to provide easy access to the Unicode string?)
>>> Scratch that last one--just noticed
>>> DocumentEvent::convertKeyIdentifier...
>> Should we really have such a method on document though? And what is the
>> reason for using U+.... in the first place. Can't we just always return
>> the Unicode scalar value?
> The Unicode scalar value is the "U+xxxx" format (the code point).

No it is not:


(You also seem to misunderstand code point if you think it is about its  
common string representation.)

> You might have meant the character value.  We have already decided that  
> the character value (if it exists) will be the attribute value.

So we will not have strings in the form of "U+xxxx" anymore?

> There are potential use cases for getting each of the different formats  
> (for example, for Unicode code points, making sure that a character is  
> in a certain range, or presenting an advanced virtual keyboard, or  
> signaling non-printing diacritics).

That functionality seems to apply to charcter handling everywhere and is  
not at all specific to event handling so I think it would be inappropriate  
for the events specification.

Anne van Kesteren
Received on Tuesday, 22 September 2009 15:34:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:36:56 UTC