Closed Bug 381177 Opened 17 years ago Closed 17 years ago

Accessible tree has changed with respect to document frame

Categories

(Core :: Disability Access APIs, defect)

Product:
Core
Component:
Disability Access APIs
Platform:
x86
Linux
Type:
defect
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

()

Status:
RESOLVED WONTFIX

People

(Reporter: scott, Assigned: aaronlev)

References

Details

(Keywords: access)

The accessible tree use to be laid out with a single scrollpane holding multiple panes (level 0 4 0 2, I believe). Each pane, in turn, held the document frame. Now there is a single scrollpane for each pane. For instance, with 4 tabs open, you would previously have had 1 scrollpane holding 4 panes, but now there is 4 scrollpanes each holding a single pane.
Failed to mention that I first noticed the change on 20070516.
> Failed to mention that I first noticed the change on 20070516. I'm not clear from that if that means you tried it on 5/15 or just didn't try it on that date's build. Is it working on 5/15?
Ignore comment 2. This must be from the checkin for bug 357969. Please take a look there and see if it makes sense. Apparently this was desired although I admit not having spent a lot of time seeing what they're trying to do. Perhaps talk to Ginn Chen or Willie Walker about it. Is it causing a problem for you or are you just noting that it was different and weren't sure if it's intentional?
Keywords: access
Right, actually I see what they were doing. This way there is always a one to one relation from tabs to tab panels, so you can map back and forth. Makes sense.
Please reopen if you have a reason why this is not an improvement.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 17 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
This is currently causing some grief in LSR, but it is easy to rectify. My main concern is the stability of the accessible tree, especially the organization of the document frames. If the change has added benefits that is great. It is a small change and I will work around it.
Right. Sorry that you weren't CC'd on the bug or notified about it. It wasn't a random regression. We did it on purpose.
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.