Ksamak, on Wed 16 Nov 2016 09:32:20 +0100, wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 07:49:00PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > > I know these behaviours are probably correct according to AT-SPI > > > standard, > > > > What makes you think that? > Well, i think there might be a reason for such a behaviour. I can > imagine the orca screen reader wanting to ignore an empty line for > example.
I believe it uses other ways to detect that. > > > but is it voluntary? > > I don't think it is. Probably just nobody ever had the need for these to > > be fixed. > > > > > Is it possible to change any of that in the future, without impairing > > > the other applications relying on at-spi? > > > > My guess would be yes. I don't see how useful it'd be to get 0,0 > > coordinates while the caret is obviously not at 0,0. > Well, I was thinking the design was not thought through for visual > applications. There is indeed no thickness to report for a caret that is > on a newline. Well, the caret does have some thickness, at least 1 pixel. Samuel _______________________________________________ gnome-accessibility-list mailing list gnome-accessibility-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
