Hi Bill. The NVDA guys are right, i.e. IA2 is defined as a COM interface
using COM things like IUnknown, HRESULTS, BSTRS, VARIANTs, COM's
definition of arrays. Code for Linux should be using ATK/AT-SPI.
>the IA2 documentation says pretty clearly that it is intended to also
run on Linux.
Where is that? I need to fix that.
Open office implements UAAPI (UNO Accessibility API). I don't remember
if there is a bridge from UAAPI to ATK. There isn't one from UAAPI to
IA2, at least at this time.
I remember Harald did something when IA2 first came out to use IA2 (and
MSAA) on Linux. I don't know any of details. They might have
transposed the IA2 IDL into something suitable for Linux or perhaps to
an intermediate form that could then be bridged to the real IA2 and to
ATK/AT-SPI.
Pete
--
*Pete Brunet*
a11ysoft - Accessibility Architecture and Development
(512) 238-6967 (work), (512) 689-4155 (cell)
Skype: pete.brunet
IM: ptbrunet (AOL, Google), [email protected] (MSN)
http://www.a11ysoft.com/about/
Ionosphere: WS4G
Bill Cox wrote:
> I've heard conflicting descriptions of what IA2 is good for. Some
> NVDA guys seem to think it's a Windows only interface, designed to get
> around some limitations in the old Microsoft interface, and that
> because of COM objects and other windows-specific stuff in IA2, it
> will never run in Gnome on Linux. However, the IA2 documentation says
> pretty clearly that it is intended to also run on Linux.
>
> What's the actual case? Does it make any sense to port IA2 to Linux?
> What would the game-plan be, and is anyone actually working on it?
> Exactly which applications should we consider accessing through the
> IA2 interface?
>
> Thunderbird and Firefox both have better maintained and tested IA2
> interfaces than atk interfaces. It might be a pretty good thing to
> access these applications through IA2. I hear mixed stories about
> OpenOffice, but a similar argument may apply.
>
> QT is a different story. I've heard they don't use IA2 in Windows,
> and that the IA2 interface is their effort to support Linux. Is this
> the case? The lack of an atk QT interface may be the single strongest
> argument for supporting IA2 in Gnome. However, if the QT IA2
> interface is unfinished, and only meant for Linux support, wouldn't it
> be simpler to modify it to use atk, rather than write an IA2 to at-spi
> plugin?
>
> So, in short, exactly what is the vision of IA2 for Linux?
>
> Thanks,
> Bill
> _______________________________________________
> 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
