I'll work on this next week, but a cursory glance tells me that something must be missing in this PR. The only change in here doesn't make sense - the code should be functionally equivalent. Especially so, since vala doesn't have a feature that would convert other types implicitly to boolean, so if the code was accepted before, checking against true should change exactly nothing.

Yeah, you are right, this one smells fishy. Not sure what drove me. Indeed, with the above changed, orca started reading the correct phrase. However, it now also reads the correct phrase without this change.

Closing for now... Need to revisit this.