Heh, I get the sarcasm there. I appreciate that most developers don't know anything about this stuff. That's why I freely share what I know as much as I can.
> (spitballing in the hopes some of my random thoughts give you ideas ;)
Thanks for that.
I think the real problem here is the conflict with the local screen reader. That's also a problem for the screen-reader-specific modifiers (Caps Lock and Insert); the local screen reader intercepts those key-down and key-up events, so they will never get through to the browser.
That wasn't so much sarcasm as dry english self-deprecation in this case. I have a couple friends who do accessibility stuff who I ask for advice when I need it and are always happy to give such - that's part of where my motivation to spitball comes from cos I know they'd appreciate it as a paying it forwards sort of thing (once in person conferences return properly 'buying them beer' will also work, of course ;).
Yeah, this is where I was thinking client-server, wherein the reader would (in pipedream world) send some sort of request through to the other end to move between UI elements ... but (a) that requires said protocol to exist (b) we're back to attack surface problems.
Though ... I wonder if, rather than trying to put together all-of-a-chromium, you could do something with a seriously locked down build based on the tauri project (which I think it was you mentioned upthread somewhere and I'm now going "ooh" at) but I'm aware I'm handwaving a lot there.
Heh, I get the sarcasm there. I appreciate that most developers don't know anything about this stuff. That's why I freely share what I know as much as I can.
> (spitballing in the hopes some of my random thoughts give you ideas ;)
Thanks for that.
I think the real problem here is the conflict with the local screen reader. That's also a problem for the screen-reader-specific modifiers (Caps Lock and Insert); the local screen reader intercepts those key-down and key-up events, so they will never get through to the browser.