Hi Willie, Please see my comments in line. On Tue, 2008-10-07 at 07:11 -0400, Willie Walker wrote: > Hi Jedy: > > Thanks for picking up the installer work again! I tried it just the > other day and noticed that the combobox problem was fixed (yeah!). > The > labelling issue mentioned below is one of the problems. A couple > others > include: > > 1) Focus remaining on the "Next" button rather than going to the > first > thing in the panel that appears after you press "Next" This should not be hard to fix but I wonder how does this affect A11Y? > > 2) It would be very very nice to be able to have caret/keyboard > navigation of all the stuff in the last page (the summary page) that > tells you what is going to be installed. I will try to figure out how to fix this. > > I can do another pass of the installer accessibility if you'd like. > > Will > > PS - If we can get some of the above resolved for 2008.11, it would > be > great. I'm still shooting for accessible install for 2008.11. As for the problem mentioned in the attached mail, I think it's related to the redesign of the UI. So Frank have to update the UI spec then we can fix this. Frank, what do you think?
Regards, Jedy > > > > > > > email message > attachment (Re: > insatller work > for the next > indiana > release.eml) > > From: > Niall Power > <Niall.Power at Sun.COM> > To: > Jedy Wang <Jedy.Wang at Sun.COM> > Cc: > Willie Walker > <William.Walker at Sun.COM>, Frank > Ludolph > <Frank.Ludolph at Sun.COM>, Harry > Lu <Harry.Lu at Sun.COM>, Matthew > Keenan <Matt.Keenan at Sun.COM> > Subject: > Re: insatller work for the next > indiana release > Date: > Wed, 09 Jul 2008 17:22:35 +0800 > Mailer: > Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 > (X11/20080602) > > > > > > > > plain text > document > attachment (Re: > insatller work > for the next > indiana > release.eml) > > Just to add a little bit more to Jedy's points: > There will be side effects to the branding of the installer > if we decide to assign labels to the GtkFrames. The white > area will either cross the label itself if the frame retains 0 > padding or if we introduce padding the the white subarea > won't won't cross the label, but it won't be flush with the > GtkFrame. Either way, I don't think it would look right. > > If we proceed down this route I think it would be wise to > drop this white coloured subframe branding. > Although I suspect this might be at odds with what frank > had hoped for in future versions of the installe w.r.t. custom > window bacground graphics. > > Thanks, > Niall.
