Re: How should at-spi be turned on?

[Peter Korn <peter korn sun com>]

Hi Michael,

> On Wed, 2003-04-30 at 16:48, Gregory Merchan wrote:
> > But my reason for playing with at-poke may be a reason to always load 
> > the modules. Last time I saw platform-wide GUI scripting discussed, use 
> > of AT was suggested as the way to do this. Using AT would should solve 
> > at least two problems "GNOMEScript" would have. As it's in the libraries 
> > and should already provide complete functional coverage, there's no need 
> > for extra work to support scripting. (AppleScript had this problem, 
> > afaik.) Because AT should be working regardless of where the X clients 
> > are running, there's no need for another rendevous layer like ICE's.
> 
>         IMHO; the accessibility code being 'always on' will have a very
> significant performance impact; and is not really the right way to go
> about setting up a general scripting infrastructure - although, clearly,
> there are many useful ideas / implementations in there.

I think this is the appropriate thing to do for a general release. 

However, I would like to strongly urge all development releases to have
accessibility turned on by default.  There are too many code paths through
the accessibility machinery that are getting too little exercize by the army
of developers out there who could be helping us find and fix bugs but aren't
doing so because they are using the default.

Think of it as using debug builds for development.

Thoughts?


Peter Korn
Sun Accessibility team