Re: [platform-ui-dev] Preference pages in 2.1 harder to read than 2.0

[Tod_Creasey@xxxxxxxxxx]

Yes Randy this was done for accessibility purposes - Jaws 4.0 does not 
always return the result of a call to IAccessible but it does get group 
boxes consistently. Readable labels are not the issue here - for a 
screenreader to determine that a text is associated with a widget it 
checks for one odf two things

1) It is a label and a sibling of the associated widget on the same line
2) It is some sort of labelled parent. 

A readable CLabel does not solve the issue of title for radio groups etc.

Tod





Randy Hudson/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
Sent by: platform-ui-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
02/12/2003 11:29 AM
Please respond to platform-ui-dev

 
        To:     platform-ui-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
        cc: 
        Subject:        [platform-ui-dev] Preference pages in 2.1 harder to read than 2.0




A few of the preference pages ("Java" for example) in 2.1 are using SWT 
Group controls now instead of a Label followed by indentation. I thought I 
saw an article on the website saying the groupboxes should be used 
sparingly. They give the pages a "busy" appearance, especially when you 
see 4 in a row. 

Was this change made for accessibility? I hope not.  I could easily write 
my own version of CLabel that will receive focus (and therefore be 
screen-readable).  If this was done for accessiblity, why do other pages 
continue to use the Label followed by indented controls (e.g. 
"Install/Update")? 

The way in which Groups are used has changed too.  In 2.0, radio buttons 
would be laid out vertically and could be easily read 90% if the time. Now 
we see a mixture of horizontal and vertical radio buttons. I guess this 
decision is based both on the number of choices and the length of the text 
for each choice, but I would ask that vertical be favored whenever 
possible. 

Randy Hudson