> I don't think this is correct. As I understand it, aria-atomic requires that
> the region be reported as a whole for any change within the subtree, no
> matter how small. Also, notifications still depend on aria-relevant.

Ok, got it.

> True when this live region (i.e. this object and its subtree) should be
> presented as a whole when relevant changes occur within it.

sounds ok.

Thank you.
Alex.


On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 11:21 AM, James Teh <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 22/08/2012 11:45 AM, Alexander Surkov wrote:
>>>
>>> How's this: True when this object and its subtree should be presented as
>>> a
>>> whole, when changes within it are considered important enough to be
>>> presented automatically.
>>
>> maybe: True when the fractional changes in the object subtree should
>> be collected and presented as a whole.
>> at least this sounds closer to my understanding of aria atomic :)
>
> I don't think this is correct. As I understand it, aria-atomic requires that
> the region be reported as a whole for any change within the subtree, no
> matter how small. Also, notifications still depend on aria-relevant.
>
> Perhaps this text might work:
> True when this live region (i.e. this object and its subtree) should be
> presented as a whole when relevant changes occur within it.
>
>
> Jamie
>
> --
> James Teh
> Director, NV Access Limited
> Email: [email protected]
> Web site: http://www.nvaccess.org/
> Phone: +61 7 5667 8372
> _______________________________________________
> Accessibility-ia2 mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-ia2
_______________________________________________
Accessibility-ia2 mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-ia2

Reply via email to