Hello Pete: > Do we have to rename the enum and struct? I don't think so. The declaration of the enum and struct related to the accessible table just have to be visible to both declaration of IAccessibleTable and IAccessibleTable2. To accomplish that, you probably need to move the enum and struct to a common #include/import file, assuming that IAccessibleTable 1 and 2 are in different idl files.
> 1) Rename accessibleAt to cellAt: I'll keep the name as is since others did > not also request the change. My vote is with Alex to rename to cellAt, it is shorter and a better name. One knows that compiler does not care, but for human hands hurting of typing too much, shorter and clearer is best. (grin) I'm good with your resolution in all other points. Best regards, --Andres. ________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Pete Brunet Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 8:45 PM To: IA2 List Subject: Re: [Accessibility-ia2] IAccessibleTable2 Alex, It's a good question. This is an issue must occur frequently, i.e. an enum or struct duplicated in multiple interfaces. Does anyone in the group have experience with this? Do we have to rename the enum and struct? Pete -- Alexander Surkov wrote: Ok. Thank you Pete. I don't mind if we leave out stuffs I asked about. I just wanted to rise these questions to ensure we kept them in mind. Also implementation question. If we don't drop IAccessibleTable the meantime then won't we get redefinition of IA2TableModelChange and etc? Alex. On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 2:42 AM, Pete Brunet<[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> wrote: Alex, It's been a couple of weeks now that people have had a chance to review these comments. Here are my responses. 1) Rename accessibleAt to cellAt: I'll keep the name as is since others did not also request the change. 2) Add cellIndex back in (was childIndex): I'll leave it out. Noone else asked for it. 3) Add method to take a header cell and return an array of related data cells: I'll leave it out since others have not also requested this. 4) Limit header cells to being in the table: I believe this should be implementation dependent. 5) Remove old rowHeader/columnHeader: I agree. This was the proposal. 6) select/unselectRow/Column: I agree these should mimic the application's GUI behavior. I think that's what I've documented at http://dev.linuxfoundation.org/~ptbrunet/ia2/api/AccessibleTable2.idl I'm in the middle of migrating to a new machine, but later today I'll refresh the IDL. I see I have some minor changes to make: - remove some tab characters (replace with spaces) - remove polish notation Pete -- Alexander Surkov wrote: Hi. I have several points/questions. 1. Consider to rename accessibleAt to cellAt. accessibleAt name says nothing until you look at method arguments. I think cellAt is more intuitive name. 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. If you'll decide to save cell indexes then we should have two methods like cellAtIndex and indexOfCell to avoid table-cell-index attribute usage because it might be not performant (because of other attributes calculation). 3. Consider to have reverse methods for row/columnHeaderCells. Possibly AT may want to get data cells by header cell. 4. Should header cells be in scope of table or should it be implementation dependent? I mean if I run through all cell accessibles then should I meet all header cells among with data cells? 5. rowHeaders/columnHeader shouldn't be inherited from IAccessibleTable interface. At least because they don't address some complex cases and we didn't achieve unique opinion how to implement them and moreover we decided to introduce new IAccessibleTable2 interface :) 6. I think selectRow and etc should allow client depended implementation if AT vendors insist on it. But actually I would appreciate personally if spreadsheet applications would work in similar way (for sighted users and AT users). Alex. On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Pete Brunet<[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> wrote: Thanks Jamie, I updated the IDL at http://dev.linuxfoundation.org/~ptbrunet/ia2/api/AccessibleTable2.idl James Teh wrote: Hi Pete, All looks great. Just two small thoughts: On 14/07/2009 2:12 AM, Pete Brunet wrote: 6) Redefinition of rowColumnExtentsAtIndex to use a reference to an accessible instead of a cell index. I don't think the "Index" suffix makes sense here anymore; i.e. rowColumnExtentsAtIndex should be renamed to just rowColumnExtentsAt. f) Pending discussion of whether the old rowHeader and columnHeader should be removed. I concur with the others that they should be removed for this new interface. Jamie -- Pete Brunet a11ysoft - Accessibility Architecture and Development (512) 238-6967 pete @ a11ysoft.com http://www.a11ysoft.com/about/ http://www.linkedin.com/in/petebrunet Ionosphere: WS4G _______________________________________________ Accessibility-ia2 mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-ia2 _______________________________________________ Accessibility-ia2 mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[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
