[Accessibility-ia2] new method(s) for fetching attributes

[Alexander Surkov]

Technically we could create IAccessibleAttribute which is the pair of
name/value strings and return array of IAccessibleAttribute objects.
It should be a bit more nice than "name:value" strings. Btw, do we
need to have localizedAttributeName like we have for relations?

Alex.



On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:47 AM, Pete Brunet <pete at a11ysoft.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the input.  How is this then?
>
> Create IA2_2
> - remove: attributes
> - add:
>   - HRESULT attributeValue ([in] BSTR name, [out, retval] BSTR *value)
>   - HRESULT attributes ([out, size_is(,*nAttributes)] BSTR **attributes,
> [out, retval] long *nAttributes)
>     where the return values are in the form "name:value"
>
> Is it bad form to use the same name, i.e. "attributes", for a replaced
> method?  Should I name it something like "attributeList"?
>
> IAText2 would have the same changes.
>
> IA2 and IAText with their attributes method would be deprecated but still
> useful until everyone gets a chance to switch over.
>
> Pete
> ---
> Alexander Surkov wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
> I think in general it's enough to have a method that returns attribute
> value by its name. The method that returns an array of all attributes
> is more helpful for debugging rather than in real life I assume
> (please correct me if I'm wrong) to see what attributes are exposed at
> all. But any way I think it should be nice to have method like this.
>
> So we could add these methods into the spec, servers will implement
> it, clients can start to use them in future when servers will achieve
> the status of official current version.
>
> Alex.
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 7:04 AM, James Teh <jamie at jantrid.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 23/10/2009 2:04 AM, Pete Brunet wrote:
>
>
> We can add the following to IA2::attribute and IAText::attribute:
> HRESULT ([in] BSTR name, [out, retval] BSTR *value)
>
>
> This looks good. Note, however, that this would require a new interface
> due to the new method.
>
>
>
> Is an array of attributes also needed or should we stick with the
> existing method which returns a multi-attribute string and thus the
> required parsing?
>
>
> The array is probably cleaner and more "correct" (no string parsing,
> handling escapes, etc.), but having said that, multiple ATs (including
> NVDA) already rely heavily on the old behaviour. This may be one of
> those cases where it's simpler to leave it alone. Having said that, I'd
> certainly be happy with an array.
>
> Jamie
>
> --
> James Teh
> Email/MSN Messenger/Jabber: jamie at jantrid.net
> Web site: http://www.jantrid.net/
> _______________________________________________
> Accessibility-ia2 mailing list
> Accessibility-ia2 at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-ia2
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accessibility-ia2 mailing list
> Accessibility-ia2 at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/accessibility-ia2
>
>