Re: drawSystemFocusRing and drawCustomFocusRing names are confusing.

On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 1:57 PM, Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com> wrote:

>  On Thurs, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>
> > However, if the name ignores the accessibility side effects, we can
> expect authors to not set the correct path,
> > since a path is not obviously needed. So I suggest we remove the version
> of the method that uses the current
> > path, forcing authors to provide a Path parameter, and explain in prose
> what the Path parameter is for. Of
> > course that would mean making this functionality depend on Path, but I
> think that's OK. This functionality
> > seems less important than drawFocusIfNeeded.
>
>
>
> I wonder if it’s worth considering Robert’s suggestion. If the
> drawFocusIfNeeded method always must take a path and element as parameters,
> the parameters may make it more clear that this method is (A) setting the
> fallback element’s accessibility region to the path, and the method name
> would make it clear that (B) it is drawing focus if needed. I found that
> many folks that I had discussed this API with were initially confused with
> how drawSystemFocusRing(element) worked because they didn’t realize the
> current path was mapping the accessibility region to the fallback element.
> Only specifying a drawFocusIfNeeded(path, element) may make the purpose of
> this API more clear.
>

I don't see how that would make it easier or less confusing. Using the
graphics state is something that authors are already familiar with.

Let's just rename drawSystemFocusRing to drawFocusIfNeeded.


>
>
> *From:* rocallahan@gmail.com [mailto:rocallahan@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of *Robert
> O'Callahan
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 9, 2014 1:03 PM
> *To:* Jay Munro
> *Cc:* Richard Schwerdtfeger; Alexander Surkov; Rik Cabanier (
> cabanier@adobe.com); Dominic Mazzoni; Jatinder Mann; Philippe Le Hegaret (
> plh@w3.org); Canvas
>
> *Subject:* Re: drawSystemFocusRing and drawCustomFocusRing names are
> confusing.
>
>
>
> I agree with jatinder. "drawFocus" suggests that it will always draw
> something, but that's wrong. The name "drawCustomFocusRing" is even worse
> since it never draws anything.
>
>
>
> I think for the method that actually draws, "drawFocusIfNeeded" would be
> good.
>
>
>
> For the other method, "needToDrawFocus" sounds good for the
> non-accessibility functionality. However, if the name ignores the
> accessibility side effects, we can expect authors to not set the correct
> path, since a path is not obviously needed. So I suggest we remove the
> version of the method that uses the current path, forcing authors to
> provide a Path parameter, and explain in prose what the Path parameter is
> for. Of course that would mean making this functionality depend on Path,
> but I think that's OK. This functionality seems less important than
> drawFocusIfNeeded. There is the possibility that authors will just supply a
> bogus Path anyway because they don't care about accessibility, but that's
> possible with any form of this API.
>
> Rob
>
> --
>
> Jtehsauts  tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy  Mdaon  yhoaus  eanuttehrotraiitny  eovni
> le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o  Whhei csha iids  teoa
> stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d  'mYaonu,r  "sGients  uapr,e  tfaokreg iyvoeunr,
> 'm aotr  atnod  sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t"  uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n?  gBoutt  uIp
> waanndt  wyeonut  thoo mken.o w
>