Hi all,

On further thought, if we do use relations, I'm thinking that new 
relations should be created for column header and row header. Described 
by can be overridden using ARIA. Also, we don't want the content of the 
header cell ending up in the accessible description, which might be 
inconsistent with the current use of described by. Also, a description 
is normally handled somewhat differently to a header cell by ATs. While 
I still think relations might be a bit nicer than the table rowHeader 
and columnHeader methods, described by/description for is problematic 
for these reasons.

Arguments supporting the relations approach:
* rowHeader/columnHeader acts on the table, rather than the current 
cell. Normally, one probably wants to ask for the row/column headers for 
a given cell, rather than for the whole table.
* It possibly requires less work on the application side. Having to 
expose virtual tables just to provide header information when an array 
of header cells could have been returned in the first place seems overly 
complicated to me.

Arguments supporting the rowHeader/columnHeader approach:
* If there are already other implementations of this (Lotus Symphony?), 
we probably should conform to this interface to avoid major differences 
between implementations. I still think it is awkward, but perhaps we'll 
have to wait until a future version of IA2 to address this.
* IAccessibleRelation itself is a bit awkward. One potentially has to 
iterate through all possible relations to find the desired relation, 
rather than being able to retrieve a particular relation directly. 
Mozilla shortcuts this by using accNavigate, but this is non-standard 
and can only return one target. If we do use IAccessibleRelation, we 
possibly eliminate one awkward interface from the equation and introduce 
another.

Sidenote: Could accNavigate return an IEnumVariant in order to support 
multiple relation targets? This would eliminate the second argument, 
assuming people are happy for that to become part of the specification 
given that it doesn't require an interface change.

On 4/06/2009 12:26 PM, Alexander Surkov wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I up to dated table headers implementation proposal
> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Accessibility/TableHeaders. I included
> several examples of heading information and tried to overview two
> possible approaches how to expose heading information to AT. Feedback
> is needed.
>
> Thank you.
> Alex.

-- 
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

Reply via email to