Hi Janina,
I believe you are still the a11y director at the LF? Can you see any reason why IA2 could not be moved to github?
Rich
Rich Schwerdtfeger
----- Original message -----
From: Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexan...@gmail.com>
Sent by: accessibility-ia2-boun...@lists.linuxfoundation.org
To: James Teh <ja...@nvaccess.org>
Cc: IAccessible2 mailing list <accessibility-...@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Accessibility-ia2] Reverse relationships
Date: Fri, Sep 23, 2016 8:00 AM
I guess we could ask them to move the repo to GitHub, not sure if there are any reasons to keep it on the LF server.A dummy copy/paste apparently makes a bad job. Thanks for the catch. Here is the change [1].
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 7:36 PM, James Teh <ja...@nvaccess.org> wrote:Hi Alex,
+/** This object is a details for a target object. */
+const WCHAR *const IA2_RELATION_DETAILS = L"details";
1. I think this is the wrong way around. "This" refers to the object we're pointing *from*. Target means the object we're pointing *at* (or *to*). Details means the object we're pointing *at* (the target) provides details for *this* object.
2. I think it'd be good to give a broader description here. I realise many of the other relations don't, but details versus describedBy needs some clarification and I think we should be providing more detail where possible anyway. Perhaps this:
"The target object provides the detailed, extended description for this object. It provides more detailed information than would normally be provided using the IA2_RELATION_DESCRIBED_BY relation. A common use for this relation is in digital publishing where an extended description needs to be conveyed in a book that requires structural markup or the embedding of other technology to provide illustrative content."
+/** The target object is a details for this object. */
+const WCHAR *const IA2_RELATION_DETAILS_FOR = L"detailsFor";
Perhaps this:
"This object provides the detailed, extended description for the target object. See IA2_RELATION_DETAILS."
+/** This object is an error for a target object. */
+const WCHAR *const IA2_RELATION_ERROR = L"error";
Again, I think these are the wrong way around. I suggest this:
"The target object is the error message for this object."
+/** The target object is an error for this object. */
+const WCHAR *const IA2_RELATION_ERROR_FOR = L"errorFor";
I suggest:
"This object is the error message for the target object."
On another note, is there any chance the Linux Foundation would let us develop IA2 on GitHub? Having to do code review by pasting into emails really sucks. Probably not worth the effort and controversy, but ... ug. :)
Thanks!
Jamie
On 15/09/2016 4:37 AM, Alexander Surkov wrote:Hi, Jamie.
Here's a changeset [1] for new relations (both direct and reverse for aria-details and aria-errormessage). Please review it at your earliest convenience.
Please object if you are not convinced that we have a valid use case for each relation. I'll be happy to update the proposal.
Thanks!
Alex.--
James Teh
Executive Director, NV Access Limited
Ph +61 7 3149 3306
www.nvaccess.org
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess
Twitter: @NVAccess
SIP: ja...@nvaccess.org
_______________________________________________
Accessibility-ia2 mailing list
Accessibility-ia2@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-ia2
_______________________________________________ Accessibility-ia2 mailing list Accessibility-ia2@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-ia2
