160792 - Accessibility APIs: use title attribute in more places

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Core :: Disability Access APIs, defect)

Description

[Aaron Leventhal]

If the title attribute is different from accessible name, use accessible
description field to expose it.

However, if there is no accessible name for something, always use the title
attribute there.

Comment 1

[Aaron Leventhal]

Attachment: Implements rules described in bug, which were developed in coordination with screen reader vendor

Seeking r=

Comment 2

[Kyle Yuan]

Comment on attachment 93986 [details] [diff] [review]
Implements rules described in bug, which were developed in coordination with screen reader vendor

r=kyle

Comment 3

[Johnny Stenback (:jst)]

Comment on attachment 93986 [details] [diff] [review]
Implements rules described in bug, which were developed in coordination with screen reader vendor

+  nsCOMPtr<nsITextContent> textContent(do_QueryInterface(mDOMNode));
+  if (!textContent)
+    GetAccName(name);
+  if (textContent || !name.IsEmpty()) {
+    // If text or if there's already a name, we might expose a description.
+    // If there is no name, then we know the title should really be exposed
there
+    nsCOMPtr<nsIDOMElement> elt(do_QueryInterface(mDOMNode));
+    elt->GetAttribute(NS_LITERAL_STRING("title"), aDescription);

Is this not guaranteed to crash if mDOMNode is ever a text node? If mDOMNode is
a text node textContent will be non-null, and we'll end up QI'ing that text
node to an nsIDOMElement, which it's not, and calling a method on that null
pointer. Seems wrong, or at least fragile to me.

Comment 4

[Aaron Leventhal]

Attachment: Don't even try to expose description for text nodes, since they aren't elements and can't have titles anyway

You're so right - how did I miss that? I guess that's why you're an sr=

Comment 5

[Kyle Yuan]

Comment on attachment 94101 [details] [diff] [review]
Don't even try to expose description for text nodes, since they aren't elements and can't have titles anyway

There are 3 conditions that makes a domNode have no accDescription:
1. it's a text node; or
2. it hasn't accName; or
3. its title attribute equals to its accName.
Is that right and clear?
r=kyle

Comment 6

[Aaron Leventhal]

Thanks Kyle, I'll add that to the comment when I check in.

Comment 7

[Johnny Stenback (:jst)]

Comment on attachment 94101 [details] [diff] [review]
Don't even try to expose description for text nodes, since they aren't elements and can't have titles anyway

sr=jst

Comment 8

[Aaron Leventhal]

checked in