[liblouis-liblouisxml] Re: present_progressive.c test
- From: James Teh <jamie@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: liblouis-liblouisxml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 08:04:01 +1000
Hi Christian,
This test was committed by Eitan. I just took another look at it to
refresh my memory.
You've certainly identified the crux of the test. However, the reason
for its failure is a little tricky to explain. Note that I think this
used to fail worse than it does now. The current situation isn't hugely
critical, though probably still incorrect.
There are two key portions of the string: the "ing" (which gets
contracted to one character) and the double space at the end. When
translated, you get:
"greetings " -> "greet+s "
Notice that the translation also contracts the double space into a
single space.
With regard to cursor position, compbrlAtCursor is set, which means that
the word encompassed by the cursor will be uncontracted (computer
braille). This means that if the cursor is anywhere within "greetings",
the translated output will also be "greetings", so the cursor positions
are identical up to the end of the s (position 8).
It gets more interesting at position 9 (the first space). Now, greetings
gets contracted, so the output cursor position becomes 7. Still correct
so far.
Position 10 (the second space) is the problem. Because compbrlAtCursor
is set, the current word should probably be expanded. In this case, it
is just a space. However, the two spaces are still compressed into one,
even though the second should have been expanded. The translation has
still contracted the second space, even though it should have stopped
contracting at the cursor.
Hope this makes some sense.
Jamie
On 12/08/2009 12:02 AM, Christian Egli wrote:
Hi all
I'm trying to understand the present_progressive test in the liblouis
test suite (since it is the only one failing).
It seems to translate the string "greetings " and compare the cursor
positions that are returned by lou_translate with a given set of cursor
positions.
The test seems mostly relevant to screen readers so maybe the nvda
people may know more about this test, its correctness and relevance.
Can anyone enlighten me why this test is failing and what can be done to
fix this?
Thanks
Christian
--
James Teh
Email/MSN Messenger/Jabber: jamie@xxxxxxxxxxx
Web site: http://www.jantrid.net/
For a description of the software and to download it go to
http://www.jjb-software.com
Other related posts:
