As another quick update:
Last weekend, I've completed the factory removal, and I have now
merged the a11y branch into master. There's of course a lot more work
to be done, but this is a nice first milestone.
Points of notice: the toolkit attribute has changed its value from
'gail' to 'gtk', and at
On 06/27/2011 05:18 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
Another week gone by, time for another status update on the a11y branch of GTK+.
- We have more tests in tests/a11y:
* a tree-performance test that compares populating a large treeview
with / without accessibles
* a text test that checks mos
Another week gone by, time for another status update on the a11y branch of GTK+.
- We have more tests in tests/a11y:
* a tree-performance test that compares populating a large treeview
with / without accessibles
* a text test that checks most of the AtkText interface for labels,
entries and
No, there is no such plan in the short term. I was just trying to clarify
how things will fit together.
On Jun 20, 2011 8:59 AM, "Piñeiro" wrote:
> On 06/20/2011 06:18 AM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>> I think we should probably give a quick status update.
>
> Thanks for the update. Just a question.
>
On 06/20/2011 06:18 AM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
I think we should probably give a quick status update.
Thanks for the update. Just a question.
In the last week, Benjamin and I have started to implement the outlined plan.
Achievements so far:
- Code has been moved from modules/other/gail to gt
I think we should probably give a quick status update.
In the last week, Benjamin and I have started to implement the outlined plan.
Achievements so far:
- Code has been moved from modules/other/gail to gtk/a11y
- Gail is no longer a module, but gets compiled into GTK+ proper. You
still need to
On 06/09/2011 06:45 PM, Benjamin Otte wrote:
Piñeiro igalia.com> writes:
5) figure out new interfaces for GTK to expose necessary features to
a11y (and other consumers, such as IM and OSK)
we should probably establish some common interfaces so that Clutter can
expose the same functionality f
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Piñeiro wrote:
>
> 4) Is also an awesome plan (proper shared libgailutil replacement).
A very quick-and-dirty sketch of this can be found in the drop-gail branch:
http://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk+/tree/gtk/gtkpango.h?h=drop-gail&id=0e11f6eb18bf75a0b4420dc60e57ad1
On 06/07/2011 03:46 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
So, I've discussed the best way forward for this with Benjamin today.
Here is a rough 6-step plan for dealing with the 'gail problem':
0) write tests for accessible implementations
1) move modules/other/gail nach gtk/a11y
2) add tons of private hea
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Piñeiro wrote:
>> I don't think we can treat that as a first step and hold off on doing
>> any other fixes until that migration is done. The migration is a
>> significant undertaking, and will not be finished for 3.2.
>
> Sorry, I didn't want to say that we shoul
On 06/06/2011 04:33 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Piñeiro wrote:
About this specific case it is about improve the documention:
http://developer.gnome.org/atk/stable/AtkObject.html#AtkObject--accessible-name
Or something else?
Well, more than that, really.
We ne
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Piñeiro wrote:
>
> About this specific case it is about improve the documention:
>
> http://developer.gnome.org/atk/stable/AtkObject.html#AtkObject--accessible-name
>
> Or something else?
Well, more than that, really.
We need to know for each widget what the prop
> Anyway, I thought that the first step here was to migrate the
> current gail (with their virtues and drawbacks) to gtk. And although
> things would be easier with a good atk documentation, Im not sure if
> this is a blocking here.
well, I'm not sure it is absolutely blocking, but I would think t
On 06/03/2011 06:01 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Piñeiro wrote:
On 05/10/2011 04:28 PM, Benjamin Otte wrote:
In fact, IMHO, some of the issues pointed by Benjamin would be solved by
this [2] and the gail migration, but lets not talk about it. As I said,
those are l
Hi.
On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 12:01:02PM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> breaking change to me committing the fix. On the other hand, the fact
> that nobody filed a bug maybe tells us something about the amount of
> real-life usage that the gnome3 accessibility stack currently gets...
> _
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Piñeiro wrote:
> On 05/10/2011 04:28 PM, Benjamin Otte wrote:
> In fact, IMHO, some of the issues pointed by Benjamin would be solved by
> this [2] and the gail migration, but lets not talk about it. As I said,
> those are long term tasks, and the fact is that the
On 05/10/2011 04:28 PM, Benjamin Otte wrote:
So I've been thinking about accessibility in GTK for a while (since it
broke all the time during the unstable GTK 3 development to be exact).
And I've been wondering how to fix the somewhat sad state of the code
we do have. Unfortunately I have no idea
17 matches
Mail list logo
