- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 18:39:55 -0700
- To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Cc: "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
On Sep 22, 2009, at 8:10 AM, Doug Schepers wrote: > Hi, Anne- > > Please change the subject line if you change the subject... > > 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). > You might have meant the character value. We have already decided > that the character value (if it exists) will be the attribute value. > > 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). If you get a string of the character, you can very easily get the unicode value of the character as a number in almost any reasonable programming language. It's actually harder to parse out of the U+xxxx format. The conversion is only useful if there are keys with a U+xxxx equivalent where the name is not just that very unicode character. Regards, Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 23 September 2009 01:40:36 UTC