Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ensure browse mode is used when reading Outlook messages with UI automation enabled #9188

merged 4 commits into from Jan 24, 2019


Copy link

@michaelDCurran michaelDCurran commented Jan 23, 2019

Link to issue number:

Fall out from #8919

Summary of the issue:

With UI automation used for accessing Microsoft Word Documents when reading messages in Outlook, browse mode is not on by default.
This means that arrowing up and down the message can miss content a lot of the time if the content contains tables with more than one column.

Description of how this pull request fixes the issue:

Create an overlay class for Outlook word documents using UIA, that uses the treeInterceptor by default if the current message being viewed has been 'sent', I.e. it is being read, not composed.
This PR also catches a UIAMixedAttribute error sometimes seen when trying to quick navigate to headings in Outlook messages.

Testing performed:

Using Outlook 16.0.1231, Opened some messages from the inpox. Browse mdoe was correctly enabled for all of them. Also Created a new email and focused in the document. Browse mode was not enabled by default.

Known issues with pull request:


Change log entry:

Bug fixes:

  • Browse mode is now correctly turned on by default when reading messages in Outlook 2016/365 if using the NVDA's experimental UI Automation support for Word Documents.

…e is turned on by default when reading messages.

Also handle the case where Outlook causes UIA to return mixedAttributes when searching for headings.
@michaelDCurran michaelDCurran merged commit dac5980 into master Jan 24, 2019
@nvaccessAuto nvaccessAuto added this to the 2019.1 milestone Jan 24, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
None yet

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants