Re: GNOME A11y: where do we need to improve? (Want input by 25-Jan)

["Steve Lee" <steve fullmeasure co uk>]

On 24/01/2008, Francesco Fumanti <francesco fumanti gmx net> wrote:
> I just read a bit in the OSK-ng, on the LSR list,... and I find the
> idea of a modular approach very interesting. But don't expect from
> end-users to work with scripts; he should rather be present with an
> architecture similar to plugins.

Yes scripting is  more an implementation detail. cif accerciser
plugins or mozilla add-ons which are scripted internally (the
definition of scripting I'm using is an interpreted language and
abstracting APIs). In this way scripts allow developers or geeky users
to easily create and share plugins thus creating an active community.
Scripting should have a part to play in situations where a service
provider supports a number of users with various needs.

> I could for example imagine the following plug-ins:
> - a basic onscreen keyboard plugin
> - a dwelling plugin
> - a word prediction plugin
> - a switch access plugin
> - an ui grabbing plugin
> - a speech plugin
> - ...

I like this, though a dwell and speech (and possibly prediction) are
better served by integration with general purpose ATs.  Someone
suggested a calculator plugin that evaluated numeric expressions,
rather like prediction. A script plugin would be useful for power
users. A plug in architecture is definitely one of the ideas for
Jambu.

> This would allow users to only install the plugins he needs (of
> course, each plugin would also install its settings gui) instead of
> confronting him with a package that offers a lot of fonctionalities
> that he does not need and that has only the potential to disturb.

That is of course a pluggable architecture's strength. A slight
downside is the need for each user to locate and install the right
plugins but that can be mitigated with 'bundles'.

> Maybe another word concerning osk-ng: the intention is to make it
> work on multiple platforms. Could you please explain to me the reason
> for making it cross-platform?

Being platform agnostic (like Mozilla) means more users can be reached
using the applications that they prefer. In addition most users are on
Windows and being cross platform reduces the barriers to migration to
Linux.

>Moreover, what platforms do you have in mind?
I think the intention was then Windows and perhaps Mac. And there are
mobile platforms and the Ultra Compact PCs (e.g. eeePC). These look
exciting from the point of view of portable communications devices
(AAC). The increased presence of Linux in these applications means
there is less distance between platforms. For example I have a
Linux/Mozilla based Nokia n810 and plan to have a play with it in this
area.

-- 
Steve Lee
--
Jambu - Alternative Access to Computers
www.fullmeasure.co.uk