.ui: Marking widgets which don't need accessibility labelling

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

.ui: Marking widgets which don't need accessibility labelling

Samuel Thibault-2
Hello,

As part of implementing an accessibility non-regression check tool, we
want to make sure that widgets have proper labelling. E.g. GtkEntry
basically always need a labelled-by relation. Some other widgets don't
necessarily need one, but very often need one (such as radio buttons),
so we want to emit a warning if there is none, unless it was marked as
not needing one.

Conversely, labels are most often introduced for a reason, and they
should thus almost always have a label-for relation, except for
exceptions which need to be marked as such.

The question is then how we should mark them. Perhaps we could use e.g.

    <accessibility>
      <relation type="no-labelled-by" />
    </accessibility>

for widgets, and

    <accessibility>
      <relation type="no-label-for" />
    </accessibility>

for labels?

Samuel
_______________________________________________
gtk-devel-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: .ui: Marking widgets which don't need accessibility labelling

Samuel Thibault-2
Hello,

Ping?

We'd really like to start marking such labels in LibreOffice, so we need
a standard way to do it.

Samuel

Samuel Thibault, on lun. 26 févr. 2018 11:42:01 +0100, wrote:

> Hello,
>
> As part of implementing an accessibility non-regression check tool, we
> want to make sure that widgets have proper labelling. E.g. GtkEntry
> basically always need a labelled-by relation. Some other widgets don't
> necessarily need one, but very often need one (such as radio buttons),
> so we want to emit a warning if there is none, unless it was marked as
> not needing one.
>
> Conversely, labels are most often introduced for a reason, and they
> should thus almost always have a label-for relation, except for
> exceptions which need to be marked as such.
>
> The question is then how we should mark them. Perhaps we could use e.g.
>
>     <accessibility>
>       <relation type="no-labelled-by" />
>     </accessibility>
>
> for widgets, and
>
>     <accessibility>
>       <relation type="no-label-for" />
>     </accessibility>
>
> for labels?
>
> Samuel

--
Samuel
X-Favorit-Cartoon: Calvin and Hobbes
 -+- Mail header of Wim van Dorst -+-
_______________________________________________
gtk-devel-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: .ui: Marking widgets which don't need accessibility labelling

Samuel Thibault-2
Hello,

Just to give an update on the list about an IRC conversation.  mclasen
wasn't convinced by putting actually-unused annotations within .ui
itself.  We can instead use external suppression files which use widget
ids to designate false positives.

Samuel
_______________________________________________
gtk-devel-list mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list