I very much second James's observation about the awkwardness of having to return a table object as the row or column header for a cell. Was there a reason behind that decision? Is it too late to reconsider an amendment? (smile)
Best regards, --Andres. > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of James Teh > Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 5:10 PM > To: IAccessible2 mailing list > Subject: Re: [Accessibility-ia2] rowHeader/columnHeader > implementationproposal > > On 29/05/2009 9:58 AM, Alexander Surkov wrote: > >> Having said this, it just occurred to me that using described by > >> relations is problematic in that you can't determine what > is a column > >> header and what is a row header without querying the row and column > >> coordinates for the header cell > > James, I think you just need to get a role of related > accessibles. Do > > I miss something? > Nope, I did. Sorry. I forgot there were roles for row header > and column > header. My concern is thus invalid. :) > > -- > James Teh > Email/MSN Messenger/Jabber: [email protected] > Web site: http://www.jantrid.net/ > _______________________________________________ > Accessibility-ia2 mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-ia2 > _______________________________________________ Accessibility-ia2 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-ia2
