Re: [g-a-devel] Trying to understand STATE_SENSITIVE
- From: Bill Haneman <Bill Haneman Sun COM>
- To: Aaron Leventhal <aaronlev moonset net>
- Cc: Aaron Leventhal <aaron moonset net>, g-a-devel <gnome-accessibility-devel gnome org>, David Bolter <david bolter utoronto ca>
- Subject: Re: [g-a-devel] Trying to understand STATE_SENSITIVE
- Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 11:18:42 +0000
Aaron Leventhal wrote:
In that case I'd say the buzzer is presentational just like the greyed
out color.
I don't believe any of the users of IA2 or ATK or using STATE_SENSITIVE
to mean anything other than STATE_ENABLED.
For one, no one understands it. Second, it's not actually useful because
if somethings greyed out it should not react to user input. As David
Bolter says, the UI designer should be shot if a greyed out widget
reacts to user input.
I call to deprecate both STATE_SENSITIVE and STATE_ARMED.
STATE_ARMED, maybe. But I couldn't, at this point, support deprecation
of STATE_SENSITIVE.
Truth is, we are going about this (discussion) all wrong. A few of us
can't safely just say "we don't understand this state, so we will get
rid of it". The states were designed with intimate foreknowledge of the
GUI semantics, so in order to discuss this intelligently we would need
to involve fundamental GUI design folks in the conversation. That
means, at a minimum, key folks in JFC and GTK+.
I think, however, that we've already identified a sufficiently
meaningful semantic for SENSITIVE that we should leave it alone.
Bill
- Aaron
David Bolter wrote:
I guess an underlying question is: do we need to expose all gui states
though a11y api? It is tempting to say yes so that we don't limit
possibilities, but if there is a practical cost (e.g. IAccessible2
implementations, maintenance thereof) it seems murkier. We know one
common approach to API design is to provide only what is needed today
and let consumers of the API request additional API later. That said, I
suppose it could still be argued that AT is more likely to use API if it
is in his/her face, but that doesn't seem to happen as often as we might
think. My rambling alarm is going off so I'll stop here.
Bill would a use case of a button that is sensitive but not enabled be
for example a button that appears greyed out but still reacts to user
action on it in some way, say with a buzzer sound? If it did anything
more useful... the GUI designer should probably be shot^D^D^D^D confronted.
cheers,
David
Bill Haneman wrote:
Aaron Leventhal wrote:
STATE_SENSITIVE doesn't make sense to me. It think it should either be
deprecated or the ATK/AT-SPI docs need to be clear. Is STATE_SENSITIVE
doing something we can't do with other states such as ENABLED and
INDETERMINATE?
Yes. I attempted to explain this in the API docs for AT-SPI.
It seems like everything in Mozilla that's enabled should
also be sensitive? Not filing a bug because I'm not sure what to
recommend in the bug.
ATK:
ATK_STATE_SENSITIVE Indicates this object is sensitive
-> Self-referential sentence
ATK_STATE_ENABLED Indicates that this object is enabled. An
inconsistent GtkToggleButton is an example of an object which is
sensitive but not enabled.
-> What's an inconsistent button? Why isn't it ENABLED and INDETERMINATE?
AT-SPI:
STATE_SENSITIVE Indicates this object is sensitive, e.g. to user
interaction. STATE_SENSITIVE usually accompanies STATE_ENABLED for
user-actionable controls, but may be found in the absence of
STATE_ENABLED if the current visible state of the control is
"disconnected" from the application state. In such cases, direct user
interaction can often result in the object gaining STATE_SENSITIVE, for
instance if a user makes an explicit selection using an object whose
current state is ambiguous or undefined.
-> I don't understand this
'ENABLED' is usually not appropriate for GUI items that don't currently
reflect the application state (i.e. are not 'wired in' to the app
state), but such buttons can nonetheless react to user interaction (in
which case they are still SENSITIVE).
For instance, if a 'greyed out' button changes to 'not greyed out' when
you click on it or otherwise interact with it (which can happen in some
edge cases), it is SENSITIVE because it reacts to user interaction, but
it still started out 'grey' to indicate that it was not in sync with the
application state prior to user action.
You are right that this is similar to what can happen with INDETERMINATE
state, but not quite the same.
STATE_ENABLED Indicates that this object is enabled, i.e. that it
currently reflects some application state. Objects that are "greyed out"
may lack this state, and may lack the STATE_SENSITIVE if direct user
interaction cannot cause them to acquire STATE_ENABLED.
-> I don't understand this
Also gok/gok-keyboard.c:
(gok_style_if_enabled): Check for SPI_STATE_SENSITIVE
instead of SPI_STATE_ENABLED; this is because SENSITIVE
has the semantics we really want, ENABLED can be false for
a few actionable elements such as radiobuttons which are in
the "indeterminate" state (i.e. no radiobutton in the group is
toggled yet). Fix for bug #136877.
-> I don't see why radio buttons aren't considered enabled in this state.
-> Is INDETERMINATE expected on radio groups with no no checked radio
button?
Not sure about this last question. I think "no" since states like this
aren't usually applied to groups, only to individual actionable
components (and the individual radio buttons are probably not, in this
case, indeterminate).
Agreed that this is a confusing area, but the semantics of GUI
components are like that (in fact GUI component semantics are where most
of these states are borrowed from - for instance read the Java JFC docs
regarding components - GTK+ is similar too).
Bill
- Aaron
_______________________________________________
Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list
Gnome-accessibility-devel gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel
_______________________________________________
Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list
Gnome-accessibility-devel gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel
_______________________________________________
Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list
Gnome-accessibility-devel gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel
_______________________________________________
Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list
Gnome-accessibility-devel gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]