[g-a-devel] Re: OO.o / new a11y bridge ...

Hi Michael,

so far I only took a quick look at your patch. Please see my comments
below ..

michael meeks wrote:
> 	Still in a very hacked, but semi-functional state; the gaps between the
> mapping are quite interesting too; Oliver - is it possible to extend the
> OO.o a11y in certain places ? eg. non-localised vs. localised names for
> accessible actions ?

Hmm, don't think so. The UNO API has been defined as with non localized
strings, because at-tools are expected to bring their own (maybe mode
dependent) localization for it.

If atk defines them as localized strings, we probably need a mapping in
the at-bridge somehow. Maybe we can re-use some GAIL stuff here ..

> 	Anyhow - I'd really value your feedback, I've also fallen over a rather
> silly problem in the OAccessibleWrapper, a crash (with a custom zoom
> combo box we added to the toolbar):

I don't know OAccessibleWrapper unfortunately, but I'll try to take a
look on this later.

However I have some other feedback and a question for you:

a) It seems that global focus notification is not working at all -
unfortunately it is not implemented in OOo yet, so the java bridge
traverses the full a11v hierarchy of a newly opened frame to add a
global listener to each object (unless it is below and object having
MANAGES_DESCENDANT state), listening for FOCUS and CHILD events.

I believe we have to do similar things in the at-bridge because I doubt
we get this implemented in the application code in the near future. This
may also solve some of the reference counting problems (what is this
->acquire loop good for ?).

b) here is the question: since I am not familiar with the glib object
system, I originally thought it would take one object per a11y role. It
seems you have solved this problem more dynamically - I am just unable
to find where ;-).


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]