Re: accessebility suggestion for Ubuntu 6.06 LiveCD



It is a pity I was not aware of Xevie earlier in the project.  It may
have caused me to change my mind if I knew there was light at the end
of the tunnel on the core pointer issue.

I understand completely why the dialog boxes are there and why they
are necessary.  They are symptoms of the actual problems.  Simply
suppressing them would do little.

My project as I saw it was not to improve but to fix.  Gnome is in
need of a usable OSK.  The main gripe with it being the configuration
problems.

Since at the time you refused to consider addressing the configuration
problems I was left with no choice.

On 24/07/06, Bill Haneman <Bill Haneman sun com> wrote:
On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 15:10, Chris Jones wrote:
...
> It is possible to detect when pointer grabbing occurs so work arounds
> are quite possible I should think.

Not as far as I can tell.  X just doesn't allow it.

> Since GOK can not be configured to work out of the box there seems
> little point installing it by default.

I disagree - we went to a lot of trouble to make GOK work as well as
possible out of the box.  That said, we felt we needed to warn end-users
of potential conflicts with the core pointer, thus the warning dialogs
(easily suppressed, as I have pointed out before).

Bill

> Bill Haneman wrote:
> >For a pointing-only user (who cannot perform a mouse click), these are
> >lockout scenarios which effectively hang their desktop sessions, so
> >these problems are very serious indeed.
>
> I'm not sure I understand.  Is this something that could be solved by
> desktop wide dwell support?

??
I don't think so, if I understand your question.

> >The "new onscreen keyboard" does not meet the needs of many
> >mobility-impaired users.   GOK should be bundled with the LiveCD - once
> >some configuration issues are dealt with.
>
> Are there plans afoot to deal with these configuration issues?
> Otherwise I think we need to explore alternative approaches.
> Imperfect though they may be, we need something that works.

There is no point debating this on mailing lists.  Please file bugs
where the technical issues can be discussed thoroughly.

I plan to follow up with a more detailed email about the pointer
grab/core-pointer problems.  But in short, because the trend for X
server configurations is to multiplex all pointing devices together into
core, and a number of problems with the way the current generation of
XInput works,  I agree that a different solution seems necessary.  I
think using Xevie (via AT-SPI, since there can only be one Xevie client
on a desktop) for all GOK's input is the best approach, but we've been
holding off on doing this since some distros have shipped with broken
Xevie support (FC4 for instance).  Now that FC5 is out it seems like a
good time to require Xevie if that will break the logjam with regard to
input devices.  This would also make GOK's configuration very simple and
allow it to work "out of the box" with all mouse-like or button-like
input devices.

> >???  Because GOK uses GTK+ for its rendering it uses Cairo too.
>
> True.  GOKs poor performance is a mystery to me, I have no idea why
> SOK seems faster.  It does however.

Have you or anyone filed a performance bug?

> >By default GOK gets the physical keyboard's layout from the xserver and
> >displays that.  However GOK also has alternate physical layouts that you
> >can use.  They are XML files and straightforward to customize by editing
> >the XML.
>
> I am also hoping to go down this route.  It is much easier to
> personalise these layouts with SOK which many will want to do since a
> physical keyboard layout is not necessarily good as an on-screen
> keyboard.
>
> >Henrik said:
> >> We haven't make any attempt get this into Gnome 2.16 as I could see that
> > >there would be strong opposition, but I think we can make a good case
> >> for Gnome 2.18.
>
> >Absolutely not.

In the beginning we tried to give guidance, but I got the distinct
impression that it was going to /dev/null.    This is why I am
frustrated - lots of behind-the-scenes vague griping, without GOK bugs
and seemingly without a willingness to engage cooperatively to improve
the existing Gnome onscreen keyboard suite, which was designed by
experts in the field of adaptive technologies.

I would very much like to work cooperatively with you and with the rest
of the Ubuntu team, but in the context of improving our existing OSKs.

Bill

> It's this kind of attitude that discouraged me from asking you for
> advice.  I can understand how my approach has riled you as a fair bit
> less work has gone in to SOK than GOK, and yet people talk of
> replacing it.  However my program is more useful to some people.
>
> I hoped to bring new ideas to the area and you seemed determined to
> squash them from the start.
>
> I'm sorry to get personal about this, and your experience and
> knowledge would be very valuable to me only it seems impossible to
> enlist your help without this kind of prolonged heated debate breaking
> out.  It needs to be accepted that there will be differences of
> opinion and to work together despite this.
>
> Chris Jones
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-accessibility-list mailing list
> gnome-accessibility-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list




--
Chris Jones

jabber - skating tortoise gmail com
msn - skating_tortoise dsl pipex com



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]