> Btw, I'm confused by your use of the term explicit name. I would have > thought explicit name was the name the author "explicitly" requested > (i.e. the override) rather than the original, non-overridden name. This > is why I used terms like "override" and "from content" in my original > proposal. We probably need to straighten out this terminology. Perhaps > I'm the only one who is confused by this? :)
explicit in means author specified it (for example, label element is used or ARIA), implicit is otherwise, i.e. when browser tries to fix name. Though I can see your point if you meant ARIA usage as a way to override name. Alex. On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 3:35 PM, James Teh <[email protected]> wrote: > On 23/07/2011 2:43 AM, Pete Brunet wrote: >> Why doesn't NVDA just always use accName for normal browsing instead of >> IAText::text? If that were the case then there would be no need to know >> when accName is different than IAText::text. > In NVDA browse mode (also known as virtual cursor, virtual buffer, etc. > in other screen readers), the text is presented to the user in a flat > representation to make it readable as if the user were working with, > say, a word processor. Thus, we want to keep the content as close as > possible to the original content. Some reasons we don't always use > accName to retrieve this content (and this is by no means an exhaustive > list): > 1. accName might contain content from descendant objects; e.g. a table > row, a link containing a graphic, etc. If we just use accName, we must > choose to either ignore information from all descendant objects (thus > losing semantic information) or render content from those descendant > objects and try to filter out duplicates (very ugly and complicated). > 2. In the case of editable text fields and some other form controls, the > name is not what we want. Instead, we want the value or text. (If the > label is visible on screen, we do render it, but that's because we take > the content from the label object.) > 3. accName contains no text attributes, so all information about > formatting would be lost. (NVDA doesn't currently report this > information for Firefox, but we plan to rectify this soon.) > Of course, we still want to honour overrides like aria-label, etc., > hence the request under discussion. > > Btw, I'm confused by your use of the term explicit name. I would have > thought explicit name was the name the author "explicitly" requested > (i.e. the override) rather than the original, non-overridden name. This > is why I used terms like "override" and "from content" in my original > proposal. We probably need to straighten out this terminology. Perhaps > I'm the only one who is confused by this? :) > > Jamie > > -- > James Teh > Vice President, Developer > 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
