[whatwg] focus change inside keypress event handler
Michael A. Puls II
shadow2531 at gmail.com
Thu Oct 29 18:58:29 PDT 2009
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:51:48 -0400, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky at mit.edu> wrote:
> On 10/29/09 5:24 PM, Michael A. Puls II wrote:
>> I think so. The event target isn't changed by focus().
>> But, in Firefox, Safari and Opera, it's possible to change what element
>> the text is inserted into by changing the focus in 'keydown'.
> Right; that happens because the keydown and keypress events need not
> fire on the same element and because the text entry is the keypress
> default action. In Gecko, that is. I can't speak to Safari and Opera.
So, just to be sure, you're happy with that behavior?
>> 'keydown' fires first.
>> If a handler for 'keydown' calls preventDefault() (explicitly or
>> implicitly via returning false), do not fire 'keypress' after the
>> 'keydown' handler returns.
> No. That breaks sites, at least in our experience (as described in
O.K., will assume that 'keypress' always needs to fire then.
>> If the key is being held down, 'keydown' or both 'keydown' first and
>> then 'keypress' second will fire repeatedly according to the rules
> This seems wrong to me. If a key is held down, I would expect a single
> keydown followed by multiple keypresses.
O.K. FF doesn't do that though. If you hold down a key, it'll do:
over and over.
At quick thought, are you O.K. with FF's current behavior being a bug?
>> Note that 'keyup' may fire before 'keypress' if you release the key
>> before an alert() inside the 'keydown' handler shows and blocks.
> This seems unfortunate, but ok.
Is there a good way to solve that though? Or is that something that should
just be left as YMMV?
> > When holding down a key, it just repeatedly fires
>> 'keypress', instead of just 'keydown' or both 'keydown and 'keypress'
>> like Firefox and Safari.
> That behavior makes a lot of sense to me, actually.
>> As for Firefox, it's different too in that preventDefault() doesn't stop
>> any events from firing. It just stops text insertion in some cases.
> Yes. We found that to be necessary for web compat.
>> Ultimately though, the spec should define all this stuff clearly in a
>> way that all browsers can implement.
> Yes, though there might be some interesting differences here modulo what
> events the browser's host environment supports...
I'll put together a new description with the changes to see if sounds good.
Thanks very much.
More information about the whatwg