The default bug view has changed. See this FAQ.

no focus event for google's moving textbox

RESOLVED FIXED in mozilla25

Status

()

Core
Disability Access APIs
RESOLVED FIXED
4 years ago
4 years ago

People

(Reporter: surkov, Assigned: surkov)

Tracking

(Blocks: 1 bug, {access})

unspecified
mozilla25
access
Points:
---
Dependency tree / graph

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

Attachments

(1 attachment)

(Assignee)

Description

4 years ago
when you start typeing into textbox at google.com then the textbox is destroyed and new one is created. There's no focus event for new textbox what is confusing for AT.

(was reported by AT vendor, marking blocking 2013q3a11y
(Assignee)

Comment 1

4 years ago
Created attachment 771359 [details] [diff] [review]
patch
Assignee: nobody → surkov.alexander
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
(Assignee)

Updated

4 years ago
OS: Mac OS X → All
Hardware: x86 → All
(Assignee)

Updated

4 years ago
Attachment #771359 - Flags: review?(trev.saunders)
(Assignee)

Comment 2

4 years ago
(don't forget to retest bug 775536 after this one)
I'd prefer this writen without using out args, any reason not to do that?
(Assignee)

Comment 4

4 years ago
(In reply to Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde) from comment #3)
> I'd prefer this writen without using out args, any reason not to do that?

what's bad about out args? doing a return value approach when it's not always needed doesn't seem nicer
(In reply to alexander :surkov from comment #4)
> (In reply to Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde) from comment #3)
> > I'd prefer this writen without using out args, any reason not to do that?
> 
> what's bad about out args? doing a return value approach when it's not
> always needed doesn't seem nicer

simpler and looks nicer, what's wrong with it? afaik we have plenty of other functions whose return value is sometimes ignored...
(Assignee)

Comment 6

4 years ago
(In reply to Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde) from comment #5)
> (In reply to alexander :surkov from comment #4)
> > (In reply to Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde) from comment #3)
> > > I'd prefer this writen without using out args, any reason not to do that?
> > 
> > what's bad about out args? doing a return value approach when it's not
> > always needed doesn't seem nicer
> 
> simpler and looks nicer, what's wrong with it? afaik we have plenty of other
> functions whose return value is sometimes ignored...

ok, if you like
(Assignee)

Comment 7

4 years ago
on another hand out argument is used as a flag to avoid excess focus checks. Are you sure you want to replace that out arg on return value?
(In reply to alexander :surkov from comment #7)
> on another hand out argument is used as a flag to avoid excess focus checks.
> Are you sure you want to replace that out arg on return value?

I'm not sure, though don't we need to move more event logic (the popup stuff iirc) into CacheChildrenInsSubtree() so maybe we should add bool needEvents flag?
(Assignee)

Comment 9

4 years ago
(In reply to Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde) from comment #8)
> (In reply to alexander :surkov from comment #7)
> > on another hand out argument is used as a flag to avoid excess focus checks.
> > Are you sure you want to replace that out arg on return value?
> 
> I'm not sure, though don't we need to move more event logic (the popup stuff
> iirc) into CacheChildrenInsSubtree() so maybe we should add bool needEvents
> flag?

a small demo of idea? If it's code clean up only then maybe we could file a follow up on it since it's a major issue and the fix seems takes too long.
Comment on attachment 771359 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

ok whatever
Attachment #771359 - Flags: review?(trev.saunders) → review+
(Assignee)

Comment 11

4 years ago
http://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/2e7ae68148a6
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/2e7ae68148a6
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 4 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla25
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.