Note however that ANY change will break stuff.  For instance some ATs 
are using ENABLED, others SENSITIVE, some both.  Real back-compatibility 
requires that we keep them all working.

Bill


Willie Walker wrote:
> I definitely agree it would be a good thing to deprecate unused and
> confusing states.  It would save everyone a lot of head scratching, and
> I have no problem with upsetting that apple cart.  Believe me, I've been
> down this path before and I still scratch my head.
>
> The particular apple cart I'm talking about is whether or not we change
> the semantics of ENABLED to be that of SENSITIVE and then get rid of
> SENSITIVE.  
>
> IMO, making an incompatible change solely for the purposes of this
> particular word choice is a change I'd rather not have to deal with.
> I'd rather just ditch ENABLED and live with the word choice of
> SENSITIVE.  However, that's only my "path of least impact" opinion
> (e.g., it wouldn't require potentially error prone changes to GAIL, OOo,
> and other implementations that may have already gotten it right), and I
> can acquiesce to the purification from naming pundits if so
> desired.  ;-)
>
> Will
>
> On Fri, 2007-01-19 at 11:59 -0500, David Bolter wrote:
>   
>> Hi Will,  I'm glad you are using your expertise here :-)
>>
>> FWIW I'm glad Aaron is kicking at the apple cart... we really should 
>> make sure it is solid.
>>
>> Apples do grow on trees after all..  :-P
>>
>> D
>>
>> Willie Walker wrote:
>>     
>>> Here's the Javadoc from AccessibleState in the Swing toolkit:
>>>
>>> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/api/javax/accessibility/AccessibleState.html#ENABLED
>>>
>>> If I recall correctly from when I helped define/write the Java
>>> Accessibility API almost 10 years ago(!), it corresponds directly to the
>>> value set here:
>>>
>>> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/api/java/awt/Component.html#setEnabled(boolean)
>>>
>>> When I look at the Java access bridge for GNOME, however, I see that
>>> perhaps my interpretation of SENSITIVE and ENABLED seems to be different
>>> from the interpretation made by the author of the bridge:
>>>
>>> http://svn.gnome.org/viewcvs/*checkout*/java-access-bridge/trunk/bridge/org/GNOME/Accessibility/StateTypeAdapter.java?content-type=text%2Fplain
>>>
>>> In any case, it looks like the Java API's use 'enabled' as their word.
>>> The word 'sensitive' seems to be a GTK-ism, and I'm guessing the whole
>>> enabled/sensitive state thing was invented with the AT-SPI.  At this
>>> point in time, however, I'm not sure of the value in upsetting the apple
>>> cart -- the best thing would be to make the docs better.
>>>
>>> Will
>>>
>>> On Fri, 2007-01-19 at 16:06 +0000, Bill Haneman wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> David Bolter wrote:
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>>> sigh... make that "shouldn't have"...  ever had one of those days?
>>>>>
>>>>> D
>>>>>
>>>>>   
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> Yes :-)
>>>>
>>>> Folks, the truth is I just don't know/remember at the moment, without 
>>>> digging deep into the toolkits.  I'm on leave today and this weekend, so 
>>>> can't be all that useful until Monday.  I'll try to figure out, among 
>>>> other things, what this was supposed to mean in Java-land, because a 
>>>> number of states including the ones under current discussion were a 
>>>> legacy inherited from javax.accessibility.  Maybe Peter K. knows?
>>>>
>>>> I agree that we shouldn't drag useless stuff around forever, but my 
>>>> concern is that just because something doesn't make sense to myself and 
>>>> you guys at this moment, it doesn't mean that it wasn't useful and 
>>>> sensible when originally mooted.  Now seems like a good time to nail it 
>>>> down (and document it better than it was apparently documented before).
>>>>
>>>> Bill
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel
>>>   
>>>       
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel
>   

_______________________________________________
Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-devel

Reply via email to