JDK-8017112 : JTabbedPane components have inconsistent accessibility tree
  • Type: Bug
  • Component: client-libs
  • Sub-Component: javax.accessibility
  • Affected Version: 7,8
  • Priority: P3
  • Status: Resolved
  • Resolution: Fixed
  • Submitted: 2013-05-22
  • Updated: 2016-05-26
  • Resolved: 2016-04-29
The Version table provides details related to the release that this issue/RFE will be addressed.

Unresolved : Release in which this issue/RFE will be addressed.
Resolved: Release in which this issue/RFE has been resolved.
Fixed : Release in which this issue/RFE has been fixed. The release containing this fix may be available for download as an Early Access Release or a General Availability Release.

To download the current JDK release, click here.
JDK 9
9 b120Fixed
Related Reports
Relates :  
JDK-8066493 - [macosx] Tab group has null children
Description
FULL PRODUCT VERSION :


A DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM :
JTabbedPane$Page presents one Accessible child, which is the Component on the tab.

The default implementation of Component.getAccessibleContext().getAccessibleIndexInParent() is to count the components using getParent(), but the accessible parent should be JTabbedPane$Page not the parent of the component which is a JTabbedPane.

Down the tree: JTabbedPane > JTabbedPane$Page > Component.
Up the tree: Component > JTabbedPane.

This results in an inconsistent index for the Component, as it will always be index 0 when going down the tree, but the index will be the tab index going back up the tree.

Component$AccessibleAWTComponent.getAccessibleIndexInParent() should use Component$AccessibleAWTComponent.this.accessibleParent to find the index of the component.


REPRODUCIBILITY :
This bug can be reproduced always.
Comments
Alexandr, please look at request from Pete
31-03-2016
Transferring to Sergey. Assign back to me if the control hierarchy is correct.
29-03-2016
- this is an issue reported against 7(7u), - there are now affected version 9 filed for this issue - 7u issues are transferred to Sustaining Nevertheless if someone have a report against 9 - please reopen and add affectedVersion 9 or 7u specific escalations might be reopen to Sustaining
10-08-2014
- this is an issue reported against 7(7u), - there are now affected version 9 filed for this issue - 7u issues are transferred to Sustaining Nevertheless if someone have a report against 9 - please reopen and add affectedVersion 9 or 7u specific escalations might be reopen to Sustaining
10-08-2014
We've reviewed your bulk request (120 bugs) and are OK with deferring them to JDK 9. You can go ahead and update these to: - Set label to 8-defer-approved - FixVersion to 9 Thanks for doing a great job of summarizing the details for the bulk deferral for us! Kind regards, Mathias
19-09-2013
jdk8: SQE ok to defer!
19-09-2013