Re: AtkImage

["Padraig O'Briain" <Padraig Obriain sun com>]

Marc,

The AtkImage interface started life as a clone of the Java Accessibility 
interface AccessibleImage.

The  first widget whose accessible object seemed a candidate for implementing 
the AtkImage interface was GtkImage. The only Java component I found which 
implemented AccessibleImage was ImageIcon.

I noticed that GtkImage can support images other than icons so I added 
get_storage_type() as I thought that one might be interested in the storage type 
of an image.

Own Taylor questions the usefulness of this in a mail on gtk-devel-list and Bill 
Haneman responded. 

------------- Begin Included Message -------------

> * What's the intended usage of atk_image_get_storage_type()?; it
>   seems fairly useless unless the caller navigates back to 
>   the GtkImage; at which point, it could find out that information
>   directly.

The caller doesn't have a good way to get back to the GtkImage (since an 
"external" caller should not be relying on the accessible being a 
subtype of GtkAccessible).  

------------- End Included Message -------------

I agree that the set/get_image_description  and get_image_height/width methods 
seem to duplicate methods on AtkObject. My weak excuse is that is what the Java 
interface provides. Perhaps, Peter can comment on this and the usefulness of the 
interface.

Padraig.



> Subject: AtkImage
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> 
> I'm feeling a little inept this afternoon-- I'm writing IDL for our 
> proposed Mozilla accewssibility interfaces, and am trying to understand the 
> purpose of the AtkImage interface.  I understand that the type of the image 
> storeage, I.E. bitmap, icon, etc. may be useful.  But why the methods for 
> getting/setting width, height and description-- these are duplicates of the 
> members of AtkObject are they not?  There doesn't seem to be anything else 
> to AtkImage-- what am I missing?  Do we need to support this interface in 
> Mozilla?  It would seem that the only useful reason for having AtkImage 
> would be if it provided access to the bitmap or something, which it doesn't 
> appear to do.
> 
> Marc
>