Talk:Microsoft Active Accessibility

Computing Start‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Disability Start‑class

	Microsoft Active Accessibility is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Limitations

The statement in the limitations section about split buttons is inaccurate. Split buttons were well known at the time, having been part of Office 95. The design of MSAA was not to have a specific-role for every possible type of UI element, but to accommodate complex elements by breaking down complex elements into simpler ones.

A traditional split button UI control would have two sections - one with text and possibly an icon. Next to that would be a icon of a down arrow or similar. Activating the textual portion would perform the default action of the button. Activating the down arrow portion would activate a drop down menu.

Thus, an implementation of a split button control could expose two MSAA objects, either both with a accRole of ROLE_SYSTEM_PUSHBUTTON, or just the text/icon portion would be a ROLE_SYSTEM_PUSHBUTTON. Then the down arrow portion would be exposed as a ROLE_SYSTEM_BUTTONMENU.

The fact that the default implementation of MSAA doesn't expose a split button is not a reflection of any design limitation. Charles Oppermann (talk) 16:39, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]