Re: Linux Window Managers and Accessibility

[cwitty newtonlabs com (Carl R. Witty)]

Bill Haneman <Bill Haneman Sun COM> writes:

> Sasha said:
> 
> >Host name might be a better solution, and by the way, fits into 
> existing
> >standards - ICCCM WM_CLIENT_MACHINE property could be used.
> 
> 
> Right, thus the suggestion of char* for the parameter type in the method 
> mapping application ids (including hostname) to Desktops.

Hostname is also not guaranteed to be unique.

> Carl said:
> >>
> >> I'm not sure I understand the problem exactly.  Does the
> >> AccessibilityBroker connect to the X server?  If so, I would think
> >> that the Window ID of some distinguished window in the application
> >> would be a better identifier.
> 
> Not all accessible applications will have associated windows.  Also it's 
> not clear which window should be "distinguished".  The 
> AccessibilityBroker itself has no inherent reason to connect to X.

I don't understand the architecture here, I guess...although that
might not matter.

What accessible applications would not have windows?  Sound-only?
Console-only?  Anyway, any application which connects to the X server
at all can create a never-mapped window and use its ID as the
AccessibilityBroker identifier.  (Applications which don't connect to
the X server don't matter in this context, right?)

> The goal here is to map an accessible application's unique 
> identification info (provided by the app when it registers with the 
> AccessibilityBroker) onto the appropriate desktop/desktops.

Why not have the AccessibilityBroker give a unique identification
token to the application when it registers?  The application can pass
that on to the window manager.

Carl Witty