Jamie, We've dropped the idea of deprecating IA2::windowHandle.  It's
used by NVDA and at least one other AT.

Xing told me Symphony uses a variation of what is in the spec, i.e.
iterating a number from 1 coupled with the use of a resuse pool, so its
uniqueID is unique within the app. 

Based on all the input please review the following changes to the
current text found at:
http://accessibility.freestandards.org/a11yspecs/ia2/docs/html/interface_i_accessible2.html#ac1342376cf195a6a6e9ee3b7e30ae3b

Change one word in the first paragraph from:

The uniqueID is an identifier for this object, is unique within the
current window, and remains the same for the lifetime of the accessible
object.

to:

The uniqueID is an identifier for this object, is unique within the
current application, and remains the same for the lifetime of the
accessible object.

and change the last paragraph from:

One means of implementing this would be to create a factory with a 32
bit number generator and a reuse pool. The number generator would emit
numbers starting at 1. Each time an object's life cycle ended, its
number would be saved into a resuse pool. The number generator would be
used whenever the reuse pool was empty.

to these three paragraphs:

One means of implementing this would be to create a factory with a 32
bit number generator and a reuse pool. The number generator would emit
numbers starting at 1. Each time an object's life cycle ended, its
number would be saved into a resuse pool. The number generator would be
used whenever the reuse pool was empty.

Another means is to use the pointer of the accessible.

Since some ATs need uniqueness within the machine, not just within the
application, they use a combination of windowHandle and uniqueID.

Pete
=====

James Teh wrote:
> On 20/02/2009 2:26 AM, Pete Brunet wrote:
>   
>> 2) NVDA needs uniqueness in the machine.
>>     
> Correct. Note that using a windowHandle and uniqueID pair is fine - 
> that's what we do now.
>
>   
>> My original understanding was that the number would be unique within an
>> application. I provided the following in the spec, but you can see this
>> will not work to define uniqueness within the machine.
>>     
> Uniqueness in the application is not really good enough, as there's no 
> unique application ID. Even given a way to uniquely identify an 
> application, windowHandle is still faster; it is one call.
>
> Btw, to clarify: I assume the idea of deprecating windowHandle is no 
> longer under consideration? We would be strongly opposed to this.
>
>   
_______________________________________________
Accessibility-ia2 mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-ia2

Reply via email to