- From: Joseph Scheuhammer <clown@alum.mit.edu>
- Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 11:22:38 -0400
- To: Alexander Surkov <surkov.alexander@gmail.com>
- CC: Joseph Scheuhammer <clown@alum.mit.edu>, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, David Bolter <dbolter@mozilla.com>, W3C WAI Protocols & Formats <public-pfwg@w3.org>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, Cynthia Shelly <cyns@exchange.microsoft.com>
Hi Alex,
Thanks! The table is beginning to make more sense.
> A note: STATECHANGE event should be fired on unfocused
> (unselected) item and newly focused (selected) item both.
Actually, the table goes on to say: " ... arrange events so state
change does not occur on focused item, to avoid extra selection change
announcements". That clause appears only under the MSAA and ATK/AT-SPI
columns. UIA says the opposite -- focus change "... should be fired
but individual selection event may not happen to avoid redundancy".
> Also not
> sure whether the spec should define an event order.
Good point. A common feature of event handling is that the order the
events arrive is typically undefined, and one cannot write one's
handlers in a way that depends on event order. But, I don't know if ATs
work that way when listening for AAPI events.
Thanks again.
--
;;;;joseph.
'A: After all, it isn't rocket science.'
'K: Right. It's merely computer science.'
- J. D. Klaun -
Received on Friday, 20 September 2013 15:23:05 UTC