Refactor "pressKeys" as one of many "user intents" #76
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
@jugglinmike This looks good to me! |
This was referenced Sep 20, 2024
Closed
github-actions bot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 23, 2024
SHA: ed83929 Reason: push, by jugglinmike Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
jugglinmike
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 8, 2024
This reverts commit ed83929. We have elected to delay the inclusion of this change until implementations can be updated accordingly.
jugglinmike
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 8, 2024
In conversation with assistive technology vendors, we have learned that automating arbitrary key presses does not necessarily align with the security model of all platforms. Separately, we anticipate introducing means to simulate more specific types of user interaction (e.g. "move to next heading"). Because these may themselves be implemented at the vendor's discretion (and because we wish to allow for vendors to experiment with the development of still more kinds of interaction), the space for simulating interaction may be somewhat fragmented, particularly in the initial deployments of this protocol. We have decided to design a command which accommodates this variability so that the presence/absence of interactions can be communicated consistently (note the "unknown user intent" error) and so that additional interactions can be introduced without the addition of entirely new commands (or entirely new extension commands, as the case may be).
github-actions bot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 8, 2024
SHA: f13f715 Reason: push, by jugglinmike Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In conversation with assistive technology vendors, we have learned that automating arbitrary key presses does not necessarily align with the security model of all platforms. Separately, we anticipate introducing means to simulate more specific types of user interaction (e.g. "move to next heading"). Because these may themselves be implemented at the vendor's discretion (and because we wish to allow for vendors to experiment with the development of still more kinds of interaction), the space for simulating interaction may be somewhat fragmented, particularly in the initial deployments of this protocol. We have decided to design a command which accommodates this variability so that the presence/absence of interactions can be communicated consistently (note the "unknown user intent" error) and so that additional interactions can be introduced without the addition of entirely new commands (or entirely new extension commands, as the case may be).
Preview | Diff