Don't we need an extra aMaxRanges argument? It seems any other array-related method has it.
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Alexander Surkov < [email protected]> wrote: > Yep, the first part was about a small correction of your wording. I pushed > the changes into a master branch [1]. I hope it looks good now. > > [1] http://git.linuxfoundation.org/?p=a11y/ia2.git;a=summary > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:08 PM, James Teh <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Wait. Sorry. I think I misinterpreted you. I read your message as saying >> that you wanted to include just that one sentence. I'm guessing you >> actually meant you wanted to clarify one sentence in the text I proposed. >> In the latter case, I totally agree; I should have been clearer about >> selection in my text. >> >> My apologies for the misunderstanding. >> >> Jamie >> >> >> On 9/12/2015 9:04 AM, James Teh wrote: >> >> But it's *not* the start of the range. And if you're going to say start >> and end, you may as well rename anchor and active to start and end. :) >> >> Jamie >> >> On 9/12/2015 5:50 AM, Alexander Surkov wrote: >> >> a small change to make things clearer? >> >> "However, in case of selection, when the user selects backwards (e.g. >> pressing shift+left arrow in a text field), the start of the range is the >> active point, as the user moves this to manipulate the selection." >> >> On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 11:02 PM, James Teh <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Alex, >>> >>> The interface/method looks fine. Just one comment on the documentation: >>> >>> + * One of the range points is an anchor, a start of the range, and >>> another one >>> + * is a range end, which typically coincides with the user focus. >>> >>> >>> I think we need to be careful about the words "start" and "end" here. In >>> the usual case, anchor will be less than active. However, if the user is >>> selecting backwards, active will be less than anchor. Even if active < >>> anchor, I still see the lesser number as being the "start" of the "range". >>> This is one of the reasons I preferred start, end and a boolean for the >>> anchor/active determination, though I realise that seems like a pointless >>> waste of bytes. >>> >>> Maybe we could say something like: >>> >>> The "anchor" is one point of the range and typically remains constant. >>> The other point is the "active" point, which typically corresponds to the >>> user's focus or point of interest. The user moves the active point to >>> expand or collapse the range. In most cases, anchor is the start of the >>> range and active is the end. However, when selecting backwards (e.g. >>> pressing shift+left arrow in a text field), the start of the range is the >>> active point, as the user moves this to manipulate the selection. >>> >>> >>> The other problem is that unless you're dealing with something like >>> selection, the terms anchor and active don't make a huge amount of sense, >>> since neither point is the "anchor". I realise that selection is the >>> primary use case, but it seems like this range struct is trying to be more >>> generic than this. >>> >> >> we could name them start and end then, and document that in case of >> selection 'start' is a selection anchor, 'end' is a active selection >> boundary. >> >> >>> >>> Jamie >>> >>> On 4/12/2015 10:57 PM, Alexander Surkov wrote: >>> >>> Jamie, Andres, all could you please to take a look at the proposal and >>> comment it out here? >>> Thanks! >>> Alex. >>> >>> [1] >>> http://git.linuxfoundation.org/?p=a11y/ia2.git;a=commitdiff;h=85deaf1a1514f0c5e6a59e8c9b6606abfb6e6813 >>> >>> >>> -- >>> James Teh >>> Executive Director, NV Access Limited >>> Ph +61 7 3149 3306www.nvaccess.org >>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess >>> Twitter: @NVAccess >>> SIP: [email protected] >>> >>> >> >> -- >> James Teh >> Executive Director, NV Access Limited >> Ph +61 7 3149 3306www.nvaccess.org >> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess >> Twitter: @NVAccess >> SIP: [email protected] >> >> >> -- >> James Teh >> Executive Director, NV Access Limited >> Ph +61 7 3149 3306www.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
