I agree with Jamie.
An application shouldn't special case anything wrt it's accessibility
API implementation depending on such a screen reader present flag.
It doesn't matter who is asking for the information for what ever reason.
Someone asks for information, so he should get it.
When we
...@lists.linuxfoundation.org
[mailto:accessibility-ia2-boun...@lists.linuxfoundation.org] On Behalf Of
Pete Brunet
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2010 4:18 PM
To: James Teh
Cc: IAccessible2 mailing list
Subject: Re: [Accessibility-ia2] screen reader present flag
Thanks Jamie, I'll have to check
...@lists.linuxfoundation.org
[mailto:accessibility-ia2-boun...@lists.linuxfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Pete
Brunet
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2010 4:18 PM
To: James Teh
Cc: IAccessible2 mailing list
Subject: Re: [Accessibility-ia2] screen reader present flag
Thanks Jamie, I'll have to check
ja...@nvaccess.org
Subject
Re: [Accessibility-ia2] screen
reader present flag
Subject
Re: [Accessibility-ia2] screen reader present
flag
...@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Andres Gonzalez
andgo...@adobe.com, James Teh ja...@nvaccess.org
Subject
Re: [Accessibility-ia2] screen reader
present flag
On 25/05/2010 11:46 PM, Andres Gonzalez wrote:
WM_GETOBJECT is NOT a reliable way of detecting AT either, since it may
be triggered by apps and even device drivers that don't have anything to
do with AT
If an app sends WM_GETOBJECT, it clearly wants accessible or native
objects, otherwise it
On 26/05/2010 12:47 AM, Andres Gonzalez wrote:
The downside is to app users not using AT but experiencing a
performance degradation, however minor.
Not so minor in some cases.
The question is why it isn't minor. That suggests that the accessibility
code on the app side is doing too much that
It seems there was talk at one time of a screen reader present flag,
or more correctly an assistive technology present flag. Was this ever
implemented? If so could someone point me to the documentation?
Thanks, Pete
--
*Pete Brunet*
If that would exist then it should be a great thing :) It would be
interesting to know implementation details and how it deals with
backward compatibility.
Alex.
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 3:26 AM, Pete Brunet p...@a11ysoft.com wrote:
It seems there was talk at one time of a screen reader present
On 25/05/2010 4:26 AM, Pete Brunet wrote:
It seems there was talk at one time of a screen reader present flag,
or more correctly an assistive technology present flag. Was this ever
implemented?
There has been a system screen reader flag in Windows for a long time
now. See the
Thanks Jamie, That may be a problem for the case where the app has
multiple threads and a secondary thread needs to be called by the window
proc to participate in the building of the accessibility tree. Is it
acceptable to block the UI thread? -Pete
James Teh wrote:
On 25/05/2010 4:26 AM, Pete
On 25/05/2010 8:37 AM, Pete Brunet wrote:
Thanks Jamie, [using WM_GETOBJECT to dynamically enable accessibility] may be
a problem for the case where the app has
multiple threads and a secondary thread needs to be called by the window
proc to participate in the building of the accessibility
Thanks Jamie, I'll have to check with the architects to see if they
would have any issues with blocking. If I can block then I might also
be able to lazily call into the secondary thread to build the tree as
needed. -Pete
===
James Teh wrote:
On 25/05/2010 8:37 AM, Pete Brunet wrote:
14 matches
Mail list logo
