In the case of apps using MSAA or UIA for testing purposes the
WM_GETOBJECTs would be expected by the app and thus not a false
positive.
I'd be interested to know why and how Watcom Tablet drivers and Dragon
Dictate are causing WM_GETOBJECTs.
Pete
===
Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote:
Yes, but my point is that these functions are not only used by
ATs. UI Automation was designed for full automated testing of Windows.
Accessibility was simply added to it after the fact.
I do know that RFT uses MSAA and UIA for testing and not for
accessibility purposes.
Rich Schwerdtfeger
CTO Accessibility Software Group
 Pete Brunet
---05/25/2010 10:13:09 AM---MSDN at
MSDN at
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd373892%28VS.85%29.aspx
indicates that WM_GETOBJECT gets sent by oleacc in response to the
three MSAA AccessibleObjectFrom* functions. (It's also send in response
to IUIAutomation::ElementFromHandle, ElementFromPoint, and
GetFocusedElement.) Is RFT using it in some other fashion? If so is
there any documentation I can read to learn more?
Thanks, Pete
===
Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote:
Any application that would test other native
applications would use this. For example: Rational Functional Tester.
Rich Schwerdtfeger
CTO Accessibility Software Group
Pete Brunet
---05/25/2010 09:37:30 AM---Rich, What other apps are using this
message? How are they using it?
Rich, What other apps are using this message? How are they using it?
===
Richard Schwerdtfeger wrote:
I have to agree with Andres. WM_GETOBJECT
is not solely used by AT.
Rich Schwerdtfeger
CTO Accessibility Software Group
Andres Gonzalez
---05/25/2010 08:48:08 AM---WM_GETOBJECT is NOT a reliable way of
detecting AT either, since it may be triggered by apps and even device
drivers that don't
WM_GETOBJECT is NOT a reliable way of detecting AT either, since it may
be triggered by apps and even device drivers that don't have anything
to do with AT, so you are guarantied false positives even with the best
heuristics. I'm very interested in developing a reliable handshake
mechanism with AT, and would love to hear from others with
ideas/proposals on this respect. Perhaps we can take this task for the
next edition of IA2 in this list, or by a subgroup of interested
parties, and bring back a concrete proposal to the general group.
Thanks,
--Andres.
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Pete Brunet
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2010 4:18
PM
To: James Teh
Cc: IAccessible2 mailing list
Subject: Re:
[Accessibility-ia2] screen reader present flag
Thanks Jamie, I'll have to check with the architects to see if they
would have any issues with blocking. If I can block then I might also
be able to lazily call into the secondary thread to build the tree as
needed. -Pete
===
James Teh wrote:
On 25/05/2010 8:37 AM,
Pete Brunet wrote:
Thanks
Jamie, [using WM_GETOBJECT to dynamically enable accessibility] may be
a problem for the case where the app has
multiple threads and a secondary thread needs to be called by the window
proc to participate in the building of the accessibility tree. Is it
acceptable to block the UI thread?
I don't see why this
is any different to creating the tree in the same
thread. Either way, it will block the UI thread, as the WM_GETOBJECT
message needs to return the requested accessible object. Can you
shorten
the setup time by creating parts of the tree lazily only when requested?
Jamie
_______________________________________________
Accessibility-ia2 mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-ia2
|
