After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 620702 - gnome-terminal script has no way to move focus to cursor
gnome-terminal script has no way to move focus to cursor
Status: RESOLVED NOTABUG
Product: orca
Classification: Applications
Component: braille
2.22.x
Other All
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Orca Maintainers
Orca Maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2010-06-06 01:01 UTC by Samuel Thibault
Modified: 2012-03-25 13:09 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Description Samuel Thibault 2010-06-06 01:01:17 UTC 
From http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=494381 :

A lot of terminal applications have interesting things going on around the cursor.
However there's no way once you have moved away from the cursor to ask Orca to get back.
Every other screen reader I've used had this feature.
Comment 1 Joanmarie Diggs (IRC: joanie) 2010-07-05 03:00:38 UTC 
Since you're taking about "moving away from the cursor," I assume you're referring to flat review.

I just tried the following in gnome-terminal:

1. Launched Nano
2. Typed three lines of text
3. Arrowed to the beginning of the second word on the second line
4. Pressed NumPad 2 to review the current character

(Flat review moved to and presented the beginning of the second word on the second line.)

5. Reviewed the text I typed and the commands at the bottom, thus
   moving flat review away from the cursor.
6. Exited flat review by pressing NumPad Minus
7. Re-entered flat review by pressing NumPad 2

(Flat review once again presented the beginning of the second word on the second line, i.e. it returned to the location of the cursor.)

Granted it's a bit of a drag to exit flat review and then re-enter it. But, that aside, is this the behavior you're asking us to implement? Or are you describing something entirely different?

Please advise. Thanks!
Comment 2 Samuel Thibault 2010-07-05 23:46:15 UTC 
Yes, that's basically what I meant.
Comment 3 Joanmarie Diggs (IRC: joanie) 2010-07-06 00:34:48 UTC 
(In reply to comment #2)
> Yes, that's basically what I meant.

Cool. Thanks for the clarification. One more question if you don't mind: Do you have suggestions for ways to improve this functionality, other than perhaps augmenting the Orca documentation to include this information more explicitly?

In other words, what (if anything) remains to be done by us to address your bug?
Comment 4 Joanmarie Diggs (IRC: joanie) 2010-07-10 07:49:39 UTC 
For now, I'm going to assume that this is not a bug -- other than our needing to improve documentation. If I'm wrong, please re-open the bug and describe what additional changes are needed.

Thanks!
Comment 5 Samuel Thibault 2012-03-25 13:09:03 UTC 
The user agrees that it is just a documentation issue (that still needs
to be addressed).