Re: [g-a-devel] Re: OO.o / new a11y bridge ...

[Bill Haneman <Bill Haneman Sun COM>]

Oliver Braun wrote:

> Hi Michael,
>
> so far I only took a quick look at your patch. Please see my comments
> below ..
>
>  
Very cool stuff, thanks Michael.

> michael meeks wrote:
>  
>
> > 	Still in a very hacked, but semi-functional state; the gaps between the
> > mapping are quite interesting too; Oliver - is it possible to extend the
> > OO.o a11y in certain places ? eg. non-localised vs. localised names for
> > accessible actions ?
> >    
>
> Hmm, don't think so. The UNO API has been defined as with non localized
> strings, because at-tools are expected to bring their own (maybe mode
> dependent) localization for it.
>
> If atk defines them as localized strings, we probably need a mapping in
> the at-bridge somehow. Maybe we can re-use some GAIL stuff here ..
>  
Oliver, you might want to take another glance at ATK; ATK does define 
API for both localized and unlocalized strings.  The AT-tools may indeed 
provide their own localizations for some things, but they also depend on 
the ability to get localized strings from the application for things 
like role name.

> > 	Anyhow - I'd really value your feedback, I've also fallen over a rather
> > silly problem in the OAccessibleWrapper, a crash (with a custom zoom
> > combo box we added to the toolbar):
> >    
>
>
> I don't know OAccessibleWrapper unfortunately, but I'll try to take a
> look on this later.
>
> However I have some other feedback and a question for you:
>
> a) It seems that global focus notification is not working at all -
> unfortunately it is not implemented in OOo yet, so the java bridge
> traverses the full a11v hierarchy of a newly opened frame to add a
> global listener to each object (unless it is below and object having
> MANAGES_DESCENDANT state), listening for FOCUS and CHILD events.
>
> I believe we have to do similar things in the at-bridge because I doubt
> we get this implemented in the application code in the near future. This
> may also solve some of the reference counting problems (what is this
> ->acquire loop good for ?).
>
> b) here is the question: since I am not familiar with the glib object
> system, I originally thought it would take one object per a11y role. It
> seems you have solved this problem more dynamically - I am just unable
> to find where ;-).
>
> Regards,
> Oliver
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list
> Gnome-accessibility-devel gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel
>