Could this be automated from the API kits that AI currently provides? I seem to remember there only being three or four times when the objects available to programmers have been updated.
> On Jan 10, 2015, at 05:09, David <trailerda...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > This might likely be for the staff, or anyone who wants to undertake the job. > :) > > Now, imagine you are developing a new app. You base the app's activity on a > set of instructions, given to you through the scripting environment and the > GWToolkit. As you build the app code, you may or may not, read the individual > chapters of the Developer's Reference. All you know, is that the app runs > nicely on your computer, which may have the newest version of the screen > reader installed. > > Later on, you may update the code of the app. Things may change in the > provided set of routines - like now that the new Browse Mode is being > introduced. And, I could likely come up with a few more cases, where your app > would base its activity on certain routines, that will require a minimum > version of the screen reader, before it will run smoothly. > > True enough, if you are good and sit half a day with the reference manual, > tiredlessly looking up each and every instruction call of your app, you may > be able to determine if any of the thousand of calls you make, would have a > restriction tied to it. But sorry for asking, how many of you driven > developers do ever do that? :) > > My idea here, would be if we could please have a table all gathered and > provided, which would hold all the instructions that have a minimum > requirement tied to it. The table should hold the instruction, and the > version number for its minimum. And, it should be quick to find, like > directly from the root-level of the chapter list in the reference manual. I > then could simply bring out that table, and quickly check if the instruction > I am going to base my next activity on, would have any minimum restriction. > At least I, would find that far more simple and quick, than having to look up > numerous chapters, and jump in and out of the reading window, search box and > so forth, in the chm window. If we could have it all collected on one and > same page, I would only have to work that one page in my restriction hunting. > > Hope this idea makes sense, and that we could have such a list provided. I > guess, it should not be too much for the staff to collect the list, based on > the raw text of the chm file. Otherwise, the only way I could think of, is > that someone had undertaken the grand job of scrolling all the chapters of > the manual, looking out for the minimum requirement. So staff members, would > you be willing to provide us such a quick-list? > > Thanks, > > -- > David > Best wishes, Jonathan Cohn
