Added UI Events KeyboardEvent

[PhistucK (phistuck)]

For code and an updated key attributes.

[Travis Leithead (travisleithead)]

I think, rather than add a new entry, we just need to reset (and generalize a bit) the exist entry named "DOM3 Keyboard Events". Can you reformulate your change to update this existing entry?

Specifically, updating the name from DOM3 to UI Events, and adding your prose about .key and .code, as well as changing the state back to Under Consideration.

[PhistucK (phistuck)]

The chromestatus.com ID is problematic... Can you add support for multiple IDs (how would that even look?)?
chromestatus.com has one ID for KeyboardEvent.code and one ID for KeyboardEvent.key, as they are shipped separately.

For my reference, this update keeps the same (ambiguous) ID -

  {
    "name": "UI Events Keyboard Events",
    "category": "User input",
    "link": "https://w3c.github.io/uievents/#interface-KeyboardEvent",
    "summary": "KeyboardEvent: keydown, keyup, keypress, as well as KeyboardEvent.code and an up to date KeyboardEvent.key.",
    "standardStatus": "Working draft or equivalent",
    "ieStatus": {
      "text": "Under Consideration",
      "iePrefixed": "",
      "ieUnprefixed": ""
    },
    "msdn": "",
    "wpd": "",
    "demo": "",
    "id": 4748790720364544
  },

[Travis Leithead (travisleithead)]

Works for me, but maybe Jacob Rossi (@jacobrossi) has strong feelings?

[Jacob Rossi (jacobrossi)]

PhistucK (@phistuck) sorry this got stale. Both of these specs are shipped in Chrome. So I think we can just link to one of their IDs and it'll be ok. I don't think we'll have too many instances of many:1 relationships between the sites, so it's not really worth designing it to support that.

If that's good with you, can you just update this to resolve merge conflicts?

[PhistucK (phistuck)]

Both of these specs are shipped in Chrome.

Only code is shipped. Or did you mean the actual specifications (also not completely shipped, I think)?

[Jacob Rossi (jacobrossi)]

Hmm. Alternatively, we could just list Chrome as "In Development" since the feature is only partially supported? I really don't like splitting it into two entries since they're so tightly related and we want to keep the granularity mostly coarse on Status.

[Julien Vink (JulienVink)]

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r1.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on PhistucK (@phistuck))

a discussion (no related file):
Long day short nights will do.

---