Hi, Pete.

Yes, it provides wrong information. At least it's not how
IAccessibleText::caretOffset or selection works. But you're right we
assume AT should check every embed characters separately when they met
it.

Thank you.

Alex.


On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 7:52 AM, Pete Brunet <[email protected]> wrote:
> Alex, given the string abc*def why don't you have to walk into the child
> node?  If the attributes are different in the child node then the AT is
> getting bad information.
>
> Or does the AT use this information only trusting that at least the abc and
> def have identical attributes and that further investigation of the child
> node is needed?
>
> Assuming that is the case then I don't think it matters how you break up the
> runs and the fewer the better.  So I approve of your proposal of limited
> ranges where leading embeds are included in a range of following text and
> any embeds at the very end are included in the last range, e.g. two ranges
> for
> [*plain*plain)[**bold*bold*) where [ is the start and ) is the end of the
> range.
>
> Pete
> ===
> Alexander Surkov wrote:
>
> Hi, Jamie.
>
> Yes, it affects on ATK as well. And it's worth to note that now
> Firefox text attribute implementation is very slow on big documents.
> So it might make sense to care about how to decrease number of calls.
>
> I cc'ed Joanie originally but eventually her email was lost from the
> thread. Cc'ing again.
>
> Thank you.
> Alex.
>
> On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 5:08 PM, James Teh <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> On 17/04/2010 5:28 PM, Rob Gallo wrote:
>
>
> This issue is a tough one. I would like to suggest yet another approach
> where embed characters would have their own ranges, and those ranges should
> basically return an empty attribute string, or a string that would amount to
> plain text.
>
>
> In principle, I totally agree with you. However, the problem is that
> this requires clients to make many more calls to
> IAccessibleText::get_attributes() than they would with the other
> approach. This isn't such an issue for in-process clients, but it most
> definitely a performance penalty for out-of-process clients. This will
> affect NVDA to some extent (we have a sort of hybrid of in-proc and
> out-proc stuff). However, if I'm not mistaken, this change will also
> affect ATK clients (all out-of-process), as the cross-platform layer
> implementation will be the same. Alex, am I correct here?
>
> Having said that, if I understand correctly, Firefox is already exposing
> these as separate ranges (even descending to get the formatting), so
> maybe this isn't such an issue. However, on a big block of text with
> lots of embedded objects, it could get a bit nasty.
>
>
>
> Here's why: embed characters aren't, strictly speaking,  text. They
> represent objects which contain their own text. And the text of the target
> objects should have their own attributes. If the object that contains the
> embed character and the target object have differing sets of attributes,
> that leads to confusion.
>
>
> The idea that Aaron Leventhal proposed was that ATs should just ignore
> the formatting for the embedded object characters, as it has to descend
> to get the formatting anyway. It is done for the purpose of optimisation
> only; as I said, I totally agree with you in principle. This
> *definitely* needs to be very well documented if it is going to happen.
>
> Alex, if this is going to affect ATK as well, we should probably pull
> Joanie and maybe others into the discussion.
>
> Jamie
>
> --
> James Teh
> Vice President
> NV Access Inc, ABN 61773362390
> Email: [email protected]
> Web site: http://www.nvaccess.org/
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to