Closed
Bug 414717
Opened 17 years ago
Closed 17 years ago
New Extensions Manager UI has accessibility issues
Categories
(Toolkit :: Add-ons Manager, defect, P2)
Toolkit
Add-ons Manager
Tracking
()
VERIFIED
FIXED
mozilla1.9
People
(Reporter: MarcoZ, Assigned: surkov)
References
Details
(Keywords: access)
Attachments
(1 file, 1 obsolete file)
1.24 KB,
patch
|
MarcoZ
:
review+
asaf
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
A.1 Open Tools/Add-Ons, and go to "Get Add-Ons" tab.
1. The Search Edit has no accessible name/label.
2. The button that is next in the tab order has no accessible name/label.
A.2 After performing a Search:
1. The list of search results is correctly exposed as a listbox, and the items are listbox items. However, the AccessibleName for any of the search results is "No Preview Learn More Extension Theme Installing… Install Failed Install Complete". It builds up the accessible name from some of the labels, but not the appropriate ones.
Flags: blocking-firefox3?
Reporter | ||
Updated•17 years ago
|
Summary: New Extensions Managger UI has accessibility issues → New Extensions Manager UI has accessibility issues
Comment 1•17 years ago
|
||
The list pane is also used for supplementary useful messages like "Retrieving blah blah" or an error message (something like "The list could not be retrieved").
These pieces of info are no doubt inaccessible.
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•17 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #0)
> A.1 Open Tools/Add-Ons, and go to "Get Add-Ons" tab.
> 1. The Search Edit has no accessible name/label.
It's interesting but they use @emptyText which itns' supported yet (bug 406095)
(In reply to comment #1)
> The list pane is also used for supplementary useful messages like "Retrieving
> blah blah" or an error message (something like "The list could not be
> retrieved").
>
> These pieces of info are no doubt inaccessible.
>
I haven't idea how they got an idea to put into richlistbox everything. Possibly strong schema/DTD usage will save from this? :)
Comment 3•17 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #1)
> These pieces of info are no doubt inaccessible.
Do they need to be? Would changing the tooltip achieve the desired effect, or does that not trigger a re-read? I'm not really sure that the nice feedback messages are really required, as they're just interstitials before the dialogs pop up.
Flags: blocking-firefox3? → blocking-firefox3+
Priority: -- → P3
Reporter | ||
Comment 4•17 years ago
|
||
Gikving this a target milestone so it doesn't slip the radar. Part of it is now fixed due to the fix for bug 406095, but the results list is still a problem and makes the dialog virutually unusable.
Target Milestone: --- → Firefox 3
Updated•17 years ago
|
Flags: in-testsuite+
Flags: in-litmus+
Flags: blocking1.8.1.14?
Flags: blocking1.8.1.13?
Flags: blocking-firefox3?
Flags: blocking-firefox3+
Updated•17 years ago
|
Flags: in-testsuite+
Flags: in-litmus+
Flags: blocking1.8.1.14?
Flags: blocking1.8.1.13?
Updated•17 years ago
|
Flags: blocking-firefox3? → blocking-firefox3+
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•17 years ago
|
||
All we need is to throw out vboxes representing labels (like "recommended" and "see all recommended addons") from richlistbox? Marco, do I get this correctly?
Reporter | ||
Comment 6•17 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #5)
> All we need is to throw out vboxes representing labels (like "recommended" and
> "see all recommended addons") from richlistbox? Marco, do I get this correctly?
The problem is that none of the relevant info from the RichListbox item is currently being shown. If you look at the items with DOM Inspector, you'll see what parts get pulled into each Richlistbox item.
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•17 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > All we need is to throw out vboxes representing labels (like "recommended" and
> > "see all recommended addons") from richlistbox? Marco, do I get this correctly?
>
> The problem is that none of the relevant info from the RichListbox item is
> currently being shown. If you look at the items with DOM Inspector, you'll see
> what parts get pulled into each Richlistbox item.
>
Do you mean richlistitem doesn't expose correct accessible name?
Also does it mean that labels inside richlistbox are accessible and don't broke accessibility of richlistbox?
Reporter | ||
Comment 8•17 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #7)
> Do you mean richlistitem doesn't expose correct accessible name?
Correct. The AccessibleName of the RichListItem is what screen readers read, and that one currently is total bogus.
> Also does it mean that labels inside richlistbox are accessible and don't broke
> accessibility of richlistbox?
Correct.
Assignee | ||
Comment 9•17 years ago
|
||
Marco, could you run through the tabs of addons dialog and test because:
1) there is a lot of similar widgets I don't how they are used but their accessible name may be incorrect
2) there is some strange names that includes all information and I'm not sure it's wanted.
Assignee: nobody → surkov.alexander
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Attachment #307483 -
Flags: review?(marco.zehe)
Reporter | ||
Comment 10•17 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 307483 [details] [diff] [review]
simple fix
This gives me the name, which is good, but there is also a description which is not accessible. I twould be good if that one would also be added to the label. Other lists in the dialog are not affected by this change, so no regressions.
Attachment #307483 -
Flags: review?(marco.zehe) → review-
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•17 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #10)
> (From update of attachment 307483 [details] [diff] [review])
> This gives me the name, which is good, but there is also a description which is
> not accessible. I twould be good if that one would also be added to the label.
> Other lists in the dialog are not affected by this change, so no regressions.
>
their names should look similar with names of items from installed extensions list for example?
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•17 years ago
|
||
Just wonder, is it comfortable to read/listen long names? I mean should we expose the rest information by another way, for example, via description or allow to catch it from navigation down of the tree?
Reporter | ||
Comment 13•17 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #12)
> Just wonder, is it comfortable to read/listen long names? I mean should we
> expose the rest information by another way, for example, via description or
> allow to catch it from navigation down of the tree?
The lists on the other pages already give the description following the name. I believe that's fine, as long as we put the name first. And the other lists already worked, it is only the search results list on the "Get Add-Ons" page that does not work.
Assignee | ||
Comment 14•17 years ago
|
||
does it work for you?
Attachment #307483 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #307646 -
Flags: review?(marco.zehe)
Reporter | ||
Comment 15•17 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 307646 [details] [diff] [review]
patch
> + return this.getAttribute("name") + this.getAttribute("version") +
> + this.getAttribute("description");
Please put spaces between the three items when you add them up, otherwise they'll be run together. With that fixed upon checkin, r=me. You may need SR from somebody on this one...
Attachment #307646 -
Flags: review?(marco.zehe) → review+
Assignee | ||
Updated•17 years ago
|
Attachment #307646 -
Flags: superreview?(neil)
Attachment #307646 -
Flags: review?(mano)
Comment 16•17 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 307646 [details] [diff] [review]
patch
I don't think this needs sr but if Mano says it does then sr=me
Attachment #307646 -
Flags: superreview?(neil)
Reporter | ||
Comment 17•17 years ago
|
||
Who can review this? I mano available or should we ask someone else?
Comment 18•17 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 307646 [details] [diff] [review]
patch
r=mano
Attachment #307646 -
Flags: review?(mano) → review+
Assignee | ||
Updated•17 years ago
|
Attachment #307646 -
Flags: approval1.9?
Reporter | ||
Comment 19•17 years ago
|
||
Alex, I don't believe you need approval to land the patch right now since it is blocking Firefox3+. Would you mind fixing the nit and checking in the patch so we can move forward? Thanks!
Updated•17 years ago
|
Priority: P3 → P2
Assignee | ||
Comment 20•17 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 307646 [details] [diff] [review]
patch
I forgot this bug is blocking. Thanks you Marco for catching.
Attachment #307646 -
Flags: approval1.9?
Assignee | ||
Comment 21•17 years ago
|
||
/cvsroot/mozilla/toolkit/mozapps/extensions/content/extensions.xml,v <-- extensions.xml
new revision: 1.62; previous revision: 1.61
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 17 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Reporter | ||
Comment 22•17 years ago
|
||
Verified fixed using Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9pre) Gecko/2008032904 Minefield/3.0pre.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Updated•16 years ago
|
Product: Firefox → Toolkit
Comment 23•6 years ago
|
||
Keywords: sec508
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•