Re: hit testing and retained graphics

On 6/30/2011 10:36 AM, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Henri Sivonen<>  wrote:
>> On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 14:23 +0000, Sean Hayes wrote:
>>> It took me 5 minutes to find these examples of people "doing it wrong"
>> These seem to be remote desktop clients that transfer the screen image
>> from another system. If<canvas>  had the API Rich is proposing, would
>> you expect these apps to use the remote system accessibility API to
>> transfer the accessibility API state over? How does Microsoft Remote
>> Desktop and VNC deal with this with non-Web clients?
> AFAICT the canvas accessibility APIs proposed would not help the remote system
> access use-case.
> I tried to discuss this previously:
> If this is incorrect could someone explain *how* they would help?

Many remote solutions (VNC-based, mostly) are being looked at for 
updates, based
on the idea that they can now be accessed directly from the web.

This is certainly an example that could be picked up, and tied into 
MSAA/UIA/IAccessible2 objects:

In doing so, the package would gain a competitive advantage... On 
browsers which have mature for support ARIA,
which IE9 and FF4 do [limited support in WebKit], the session would have 
an opportunity to load a11y information
for the remote application environment, and that would then appear on 
the local environment without loss of fidelity.

Does that get close to an explanation?  These VNC viewers already use a 
server on the remote desktop,
to handle transition into WebSockets -- if the client (the browser 
supported it), patching those services to include a pass-thru for A11y,
would benefit users.

I know you have a firm grasp of the services out there, I'm surprised by 
the conclusion you came to.


Received on Thursday, 30 June 2011 20:02:54 UTC