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 570571 - (ARIA) Microsoft tree labels off by one
(ARIA) Microsoft tree labels off by one
Status: RESOLVED NOTABUG
Product: orca
Classification: Applications
Component: general
unspecified
Other All
: Normal normal
: 2.24.4
Assigned To: Joanmarie Diggs (IRC: joanie)
Orca Maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks: 404403
 
 
Reported: 2009-02-04 22:42 UTC by Willie Walker
Modified: 2009-02-12 18:50 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
regression test (7.68 KB, patch)
2009-02-12 18:43 UTC, Joanmarie Diggs (IRC: joanie)
committed Details | Review

Description Willie Walker 2009-02-04 22:42:34 UTC
1) Go to http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/ietestcenter/Aria/samples/tree/ariatree.htm
2) Expand an item and move into the list.  The crazy Microsoft tree skips every other item when you navigate (not an Orca bug).  Orca presents the item above the item that has focus.

NOTE: I think the developers may have created this widget immediately after doing bong hits with Michael Phelps.  It certainly is a strange one and I think we might consider closing this one as WONTFIX after we've done more investigation.
Comment 1 Joanmarie Diggs (IRC: joanie) 2009-02-12 18:43:06 UTC
Created attachment 128579 [details] [review]
regression test

Regression test. Committed to trunk.
Comment 2 Joanmarie Diggs (IRC: joanie) 2009-02-12 18:50:11 UTC
What I'm seeing now (post a number of ARIA-related caret navigation fixes) is this:

1. Without Orca running, we get the focus behavior described by Will, namely the skipping of items.

2. It looks like the skipped item claims focus initially, but the item after it immediately claims focus.

3. Orca is presenting each item that gains focus (i.e. the first item which claims it and then loses it, followed by the item which stole it). This, to me, is the expected behavior. 

If, when this bug was filed, we were only presenting the item which ultimately was skipped over I would call that a bug that we should fix. Now that we are providing access to what is taking place and ultimately correctly presenting the item with focus, I would call this NOTABUG.

The attached patch is a regression test so that we can look for changes (regressions) in our testing of other (less funky) widgets. :-)