https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=159369

Michael Weghorn <[email protected]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|                            |103182

--- Comment #4 from Michael Weghorn <[email protected]> ---
(In reply to Michael Weghorn from comment #2)
> Since this worked OK in a quick test with Gedit, the problem might be 1),
> i.e. LO's window-relative coords still not being fully accurate after the
> changes done in the context of tdf#149952, but that would need further
> examination.

Indeed, something is going wrong there. attachment 192177 demonstrates one
issue: The relative position of the doc/paragraph is incorrect.
The screencast demonstrates clicking through LO's a11y hierarchy in a modified
version of Accerciser (s. comment below). 
When moving from the "panel" to its "root pane" child, the y position is too
low: It includes the menu bar, but not the status bar. It should most likely be
the other way around, since the menu bar is a native one.
Actually, when disabling the menu bar (by switching to the Tabbed interface),
the area highlighted by the modified Accerciser version is correct.
Indeed, when retesting the use-case described here with the Tabbed interface,
the typed text is visible, i.e. focus-tracking works (better).

The text is still at the very bottom of the screen (while it is pretty much in
the middle with Gedit), so there might be further aspects that need
consideration.

(This is with a local, modified test version of Accerciser that queries the
window coords from KWin in a Plasma Wayland session, since Accerciser currently
depends on desktop coords otherwise and wouldn't highlight the correct area at
all.)

I vaguely remember jmux mentioning in the past that there's some hack to
support native menu bars that involves fiddling with the menubar height (and
afc828b9833b7a612369e95606ba56d41ef2c369 looks related at a first glance, this
was reverted later), maybe this is backfiring here?


> (I've also commented on
> https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/issues/4112 accordingly)

That one was indeed closed as fixed now, referring to the GNOME magnifier
commit I mentioned earlier.


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103182
[Bug 103182] [META] GTK3-specific bugs
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

Reply via email to