On 16/07/2009 1:03 AM, Alexander Surkov wrote: > 2. It's might be worth to keep cellIndex. > Cell index is unique numeric identifier of cell accessible.If AT > wants to navigate through all cells then it's easier to have one loop > to run through all cells, otherwise AT is forced to have nested loops > which can be not optimal if table has spanned cells or cell holes. I'm not sure I follow this. Do you mean you'd iterate starting at 0 and call a method on the table to retrieve each cell until it failed? Why not just iterate through the children of the table? In Gecko's case, you'd have to descend into text frames and rows, but that's what we have to do now anyway.
> 3. Consider to have reverse methods for row/columnHeaderCells. > Possibly AT may want to get data cells by header cell. ... > 5. rowHeaders/columnHeader shouldn't be inherited from > IAccessibleTable interface. Sorry to bring this up again, but did we ever actually abandon the idea of using relations? If we use relations, we certainly need specific relations instead of using description for/described by. However, with a specific relation, it does seem that this might be a nicer fit. It'd also be nice to have a relation from a cell to its table so we don't have to crawl up the parent hierarchy in cases like Mozilla. We'd definitely need a better relation interface to do this, however, as the current interface is highly inefficient (fetch all relation names and then index, rather than direct relation fetch). -- 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
