<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=windows-1256"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
The Firefox 1.5 UI has to support MSAA perfectly to work with Windows
AT's as the widgets are all windowless. Because of work we did with AT
vendors to support Firefox, MSAA is now a fine way to expose UI's to
assistive tech. It's really in content where it falls short.<br>
On the other hand, UI Automation could be the future but it's very far
away in terms of support from AT vendors.<br>
<br>
If you follow some guidelines for MSAA support you'll be fine. The MSDN
docs will get you partially there, and I've attempted to document the
rest of what's needed in <a
href="http://www.mozilla.org/access/windows/msaa-server">Implementing
an MSAA Server, A Practical Guide</a> and <a
href="http://www.mozilla.org/access/toolkit-checklist">Accessible
Toolkit Checklist</a><br>
It may also be interesting to read: <a
href="http://www.mozilla.org/access/windows/at-apis">Gecko Info for
Windows Accessibility Vendors</a><br>
<br>
Microsoft, Freedom Sci and GW Micro even use these docs as examples of
how to deal with MSAA issues. You can look at it with MSAA tools to see
how to expose each type of widget or read the docs from above.<br>
<br>
- Aaron<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Bill Haneman wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid437B1278.3060705@sun.com" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">One thing to bear in mind is that MSAA's days seem quite numbered, as
the last I heard was that it is scheduled for deprecation/replacement in
Longhorn, possibly in Office 12 as well but I have no details to hand
about that. It's not clear that writing to MSAA is a good strategy even
for the medium-term.
Bill
Gary Cramblitt wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Monday 14 November 2005 08:00 pm, Leo Spalteholz wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Specifically for Qt, support is quite poor (although Openoffice is far
worse).
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Leo responded to me that this is Qt4. That's very disappointing. Leo please
do report these to Trolltech and keep us informed.
I can understand the menu problems you report had you said Qt3. The QMenuBar
and QPopupMenu widgets contained the individual menu items in a QMenuData
structure that (I'm guessing) did not inherit the QAccessible interface. In
Qt4, the menus have been unified into a QMenu widget with QAction items. I
would have thought QAction would inherit the QAccessible interface and
provide the accessible information. Perhaps it is because QAction inherits
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->>from QObject, not QWidget that Inspect32 doesn't see the accessible info? Or
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">perhaps Inspect32 doesn't know how to ask the QMenu widget for the individual
menu items?
The listview problems are probably similar issues. Are you using the
model/view architecture?
I'm also a bit confused because I had understood there must be an accessible
plugin installed that intermediates between Qt and Inspect32. ???
My understanding is that oo.org does not support MSAA. It does support the
Java Accessibility API and AT-SPI, so it isn't surprising at all that
Inspect32 would "fail miserably" on oo.org.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
_______________________________________________
kde-accessibility mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:kde-accessibility@kde.org">kde-accessibility@kde.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-accessibility">https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-accessibility</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>