Hi, guys. One more question.

Should we expose any text attributes for a range containing embedded
characters? I lean towards to think we should return empty string for
text attributes since text attributes makes sense for normal text
only.

Thank you.
Alex.

On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Alexander Surkov
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Ok, thanks James. I'll come with Rob's approach, then I will send try
> Firefox build to Orca developers to check if performance is good
> enough.
>
> Alex.
>
>
> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 1:09 PM, James Teh <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 18/05/2010 11:52 PM, Alexander Surkov wrote:
>>> Aaron suggestion was like [*plain*plain**)[bold*bold*), which I come here 
>>> with.
>> This is the most complicated and potentially confusing, but also the
>> least expensive for out-of-process clients. Have you had any feedback
>> from the Orca devs on this?
>>
>>> Your suggestion was [*)[plain)[*)[plain)[**)[bold)[*)[bold)[*).
>> I like this solution most in that it is still quite logical without
>> incurring the unnecessary overhead of having separate ranges for every
>> embedded object character.
>>
>>> My last suggestion (based on your suggestion) was
>>> [*)[plain)[*)[plain)[*)[*)[bold)[*)[bold)[*).
>>> [This] suggestion is quicker supposedly if
>>> we don't think about method call cost
>> I assume you mean quicker on the app side? I don't think it would ever
>> be quicker on the AT side.
>>
>> 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

Reply via email to