Re: [g-a-devel] Coming to grips with the state of a11y in gtk

[Matthias Clasen <matthias clasen gmail com>]

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:03 AM, Piñeiro <apinheiro igalia com> wrote:

>
> Although move the gail implementation to gtk has his advantages, why
> this would be better that just fix them directly on gail? One of the
> big problems here is the lack of resources, so doing the move would
> add a extra work that could be used to just fix the problems.

The move ends one of the biggest source of problems with the a11y
implementations as they are now: they are separate objects living
outside of gtk and have to duplicate lots of widget state by listening
for signals and poking at the widgets from the outside. That is both
terribly inefficient, and prone to reentry problems. Just look at how
often gailtreeview iterates over the entire model, e.g....


> That's obviously bad. Just for curiosity:
>  * I guess that gtk3, right?
>  * at-spi2?

gtk3-demo and at-spi2, yes.

>  * Are you sure that at-spi1 is not there (I had some problems if by
>    error I have both running at the same time)

I haven't particularly checked.
But if the two are incompatible, they should really take measures to
prevent running them in parallel, like taking a well-known busname...