Re: gtkhtml2 vs. gtkhtml1

[Bill Haneman <bill haneman sun com>]

On Thu, 2002-09-19 at 11:06, Michael Meeks wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-09-18 at 13:42, Sander Vesik wrote:
> > > 	The question is - is that a sensible requirement; and does it fit in
> > > with the way Gnome a11y works ? or is that a minimum requirement for
> > > things that have no other form of accessible interface.
> > 
> > I think one question here is - what happens if the page is not static but
> > dynamic and being operated on via say the DOM bindings? (Be it then from
> > C, or ecmascript or python or something else entirely).
> 
> 	What happens in any case where things that have AtkObjects associated
> with them are manipulated - created, destroyed, renamed etc.?
> This is of course a very common occurence during the construction /
> destruction of GUIs, and thus we have to support it in atk, by various
> means of signalling tree hierarchy changes.

Yep, we handle this reasonably well now I believe.

> 
> 	Since we effectively provide a sort of 'DOM' via the Atk system, it
> seems particularly pointless to waste a huge amount of time creating
> another parallel-but-different way to do so, since it cannot (shouldn't)
> add anything useful that Atk+ doesn't do.

But a "sort of DOM" is not w3c DOM, which is what the w3c UAG requires.

-Bill
 
> 	Regards,
> 
> 		Michael.
> 
> -- 
>  mmeeks gnu org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
>