On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 7:22 PM, James Teh <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 30/09/2014 2:32 AM, Joanmarie Diggs wrote: > >> Given a large data set where the set size is not known (e.g. gmail's "1 >> of about 120"), we need a way to be able to communicate the known set >> size along with the fact that the total is not (yet) known. One proposal >> has been to expose this via something like "120+". The problem with that >> is it means most of the time set size is a number, except for when it's >> a string one needs to parse. Seems like a less-than-ideal situation to me. >> > Agreed. It's even worse in IA2 because it has a groupPosition property > which uses ints, not strings, so it would be impossible to expose the "+" > in that case. > > In ATK, we happily have STATE_INDETERMINATE which seems like it would >> fit the bill nicely,making it possible for quantifiable things like set >> size to remain numbers and giving implementors a means to indicate the >> size is indeterminate. In chatting with Alex Surkov about this, he >> seemed to think this was a reasonable approach. The only "problem" was >> that the ATK docs specifically said this state was for tri-state >> checkboxes in the mixed state. >> > In IA2, this is exposed using MSAA's STATE_SYSTEM_MIXED (since IA2 is a > superset of MSAA). While we *could* use this, there are two problems: > 1. We can't update the documentation for MSAA, and even if we could, this > wouldn't make sense because MSAA doesn't have groupPosition. I guess we > could document an addition to STATE_SYSTEM_MIXED in the IA2 spec, but > that's rather ugly. > 2. This could be confusing for clients which support MSAA but not IA2. > Therefore, we'd probably need to introduce a new IA2 state. > STATE_INDETERMINATE? both for tri-state checkboxes and groups of unknown size? > > I just solved that with new docs. This >> change has just been committed. [1] So we're good. >> > I'm not sure if this is an issue for ATK, but one problem I see is that in > IA2, it's possible for any control to be checkable. This could include an > item which has groupPosition. So, for example, what if there were a > tri-state checkable tree item? How would you tell whether it were tri-state > or in an indeterminate group? > > Jamie > > -- > James Teh > Executive Director, NV Access Limited > Ph +61 7 3149 3306 > www.nvaccess.org > Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess > Twitter: @NVAccess > SIP: [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > 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
