I referred to relations as a concept, which is exposed via IAccessibleRelation or accNavigate.
IA2 relations don't have to be expensive, IA2 provides relationTargetsOfType which returns multiple targets for a relation type and lighter version of IAccessibleRelation array. On the other hand, IAccessibleRelation can be instantiated lazily too. Or do you mean that some AT run through relations over and over and you have to maintain up-to-dated data? Magic values should work, however cellAt(0, n) or cellAt(n, 0) is either confusing or not helpful if initial cells are missed. We could do negative values (for example, -1 and -2 as we do for offsets), which is less intuitive but less ambiguous. Alex. On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Dominic Mazzoni <dmazz...@google.com> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 11:25 AM Alexander Surkov < > surkov.alexan...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Dominic Mazzoni <dmazz...@google.com> >> wrote: >> >> Agreed, finding the first or last cell in a row isn't hard. But finding >> the first or last cell in a column is hard, and some AT already have a >> command for that. >> >> >> Got it. We of course can have extra pair of relations for this. I wish we >> had strings for relations as we have for object attributes. That would free >> us from changing IDL over and over. >> > > If you're talking about IAccessibleRelation, aren't relations expensive? > We have to keep track of all of the relations for each accessible object > currently because you can iterate over them and get one by index. I'd > prefer a new constant for accNavigate if that's allowed, otherwise maybe > adding new magic constants that you could use with cellAt(). > >
_______________________________________________ Accessibility-ia2 mailing list Accessibility-ia2@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-ia2
