Add human readable programmatic enum name/values to chrome.automation.

chrome/renderer/resources/extensions/automation_custom_bindings.js

 // Copyright 2014 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
 // Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
 // found in the LICENSE file.
 
 // Custom bindings for the automation API.
 var AutomationNode = require('automationNode').AutomationNode;
 var AutomationTree = require('automationTree').AutomationTree;
 var automation = require('binding').Binding.create('automation');
 var automationInternal =
     require('binding').Binding.create('automationInternal').generate();
 var eventBindings = require('event_bindings');
 var Event = eventBindings.Event;
 var lastError = require('lastError');
+var schema =
+    requireNative('automationInternal').GetSchemaAdditions();
 
 // TODO(aboxhall): Look into using WeakMap
 var idToAutomationTree = {};
 var idToCallback = {};
 
 // TODO(dtseng): Move out to automation/automation_util.js or as a static member
 // of AutomationTree to keep this file clean.
 /*
  * Creates an id associated with a particular AutomationTree based upon a
  * renderer/renderer host pair's process and routing id.
@@ skipping 81 matching lines @@
       for (var i = 0; i < idToCallback[id].length; i++) {
         var callback = idToCallback[id][i];
         callback(targetTree);
       }
       delete idToCallback[id];
     }
   }
 });
 
 exports.binding = automation.generate();
+
+// Additional bindings adopted from Accessibility.
+exports.binding.Event = schema.Event;
+exports.binding.Role = schema.Role;
+exports.binding.State = schema.State;

[not at google - send to devlin, 2014/05/29 18:26:21]

you could go:

forEach(schema, function(k, v) {
  exports.binding[k] = v;
});

[aboxhall, 2014/05/29 18:35:49]

-1 current code has same number of lines and is more readable. 

[not at google - send to devlin, 2014/05/29 18:45:50]

I don't think it's the job of this code to know what "schema additions" are.
That's the job of the place that gives us the schema additions.

[David Tseng, 2014/05/29 19:04:40]

Do you feel strongly? I could go either way on this.

[not at google - send to devlin, 2014/05/29 19:48:14]

I rarely feel strongly to push back on a push back. I think it's better though,
in the same way that we automatically populate the bindings from
automation.generate(), we could automatically populate the rest of it from
whatever the "additions" are.

[David Tseng, 2014/05/29 22:12:25]

Ok; I've left a better comment. Also, I think we might have additional top level
bindings here at some point (e.g. for text direction), so I've gone with
kalman's suggestion here.