Re: [g-a-devel]Re: atkgobjectaccessible bug ...

[Bill Haneman <bill haneman sun com>]

Michael Meeks wrote:

>         Interesting, I didn't realize the AtkImplementor stuff existed, that
> sounds like a nice way to do accessibility.
> 
>         Problem is we now have about 5 different ways to do the same thing, and
> the confusion doesn't seem to be that useful ;-)

Hmm, well I think that at least as far as AtkObject versus
AtkImplementor goes,
the different methods serve different purposes.  True, all GtkWidgets
are
AtkImplementors and thus we could use the AtkImplementor interface
there as well, but for GtkWidgets the "direct" API is more efficient and
easier to use.

So:  for widgets:

	gtk_widget_get_accessible

For all AtkImplementors (including GtkWidgets):

	atk_implementor_ref_accessible

and of course for new objects one could either define a factory
or override the appropriate get_accessible or ref_accessible
method.

Doesn't see overly complex to me ;-)

It's only confusing (seemingly overspecified) if you 
fail to distinguish between the two API calls ("client side") 
and the implementation-side options (of which there are basically 
two in each case, either a factory or direct overriding of 
the AtkObject accessor function).

The AtkImplementor API is flexible and allows for
query (i.e. "are you an accessible thing?") but has the
disadvantage of requiring the caller to decrement the
ref count when done, whereas the gtk_widget API keeps
a persistent ATK object reference.

Regards,

Bill

>         Regards,
> 
>                 Michael.
> 
> --
>  mmeeks gnu org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list
> Gnome-accessibility-devel gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel