Re: Accessability Interfaces
- From: Bill Haneman <Bill Haneman Sun COM>
- To: Steve Lee <steve fullmeasure co uk>
- Cc: David Bolter <david bolter utoronto ca>, gnome-accessibility-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Accessability Interfaces
- Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2006 15:20:54 +0000
Steve Lee wrote:
Well I was really making a fairly general question ignoring the layers
and agree it depends on the language or libraries you use. My question
was not so much the mechanics but more what you are conceptually
doing. Perhaps it is rather fuzzy distinction. It's all useful info
thanks David.
My main experience is with the windows equivs of MSAA and COM. Using C
you can do it the painful way of rolling all your own low level client
code, you can use general classes and libraries, you can use #imports
that creates classes for you from the IDL. In Python for general com
you use Mark Hammond's wonderful code that creates python classes from
the IDL (though event sinks are a little fidely).
From what I've seen ATK provides an abstract API devoid of CORBA
details and perhaps even a little different from AT-SPI. Rather like
the Python COM classes, or a library built on top of them.
Yes, but bear in mind that ATK is an in-process API and therefore is not
available to assistive technologies (since they are in a separate
process space from the apps which provide the ATK services). ATK is not
an abstraction on top of AT-SPI, but vice-versa.
You might find this presentation of interest:
http://www.gnome.org/~billh/ArchitecturalOverview.odp
Bill
Steve
On 11/8/06, *Bill Haneman* <Bill Haneman sun com
<mailto:Bill Haneman sun com>> wrote:
Hi David, Steve:
I think there are two aspects to Steve's question. One aspect has
to do
with the exact API call syntax that the client uses to access AT-SPI,
which I think is what you are referring to. The "raw" C CORBA
bindings
are a bit ugly (while the python ones are elegant) but don't actually
require the client to add any CORBA-specific code. The second aspect
of the question is the one I was addressing - whether the client
needs
to know much about CORBA details. That also depends a little on the
client's programming language, but mostly the answer is "no", the only
place where the AT-SPI client has to write any CORBA code is when
it's
implementing the AT-SPI "EventListener" interface which it passes
to the
AT-SPI Registry, via which the client receives event notifications
from
running applications.
best regards
Bill
David Bolter wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> The at-spi hides nasty stuff like CORBA behind an API. In early
days we
> used the cspi bindings (for C), but we should all now use the
normative
> C library libspi. I imagine you are most interested in python
bindings
> -- which I haven't used (yet).
>
> Note, gok hasn't migrated from cspi to libspi yet (blush).
>
> cheers,
> David
> GOK Maintainer
>
> Steve Lee wrote:
>
>> Out of interest do assistive technologies (AT) get to use an
API or
>> library (similar to ATK for the server applications) or do they use
>> direct CORBA calls?
>>
>>
--
Steve Lee
www.oatsoft.org <http://www.oatsoft.org>
www.fullmeasure.co.uk <http://www.fullmeasure.co.uk>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
gnome-accessibility-list mailing list
gnome-accessibility-list gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]