Re: [orca-list] Accessibility of apps

[kendell clark <coffeekingms gmail com>]

hi
Obligate is rather strong. Do I think software developers are obligated
to make their software accessible if at all possible? Well, to be
honest, yes. But that's only because if it's inaccessible, I can't use
it. No iffs, ands, or buts. However, rather than tell developers this,
which would quickly get have a nice day, I try to tell them how simple
most accessibility fixes are. And that's the kicker. Most accessibility
fixes are minor things. I've hand edited xml files generated by tools
like glade, and the result was a much much better application. That was
pamac, the graphical manjaro package manager. But the thing that often
drives my rants, and you guys have seen them, is when despite how simple
it can be, people simply choose not to do it. Their reasons are legion.
It's too hard, I don't have enough time, can't someone else do it, it's
not my bug, just use (insert platform here), on and on and on. It's why
I had a near miss with windows 10 back in december. I nearly switched
over out of sheer frustration. I try and I try and I try and still ... I
need help. I need you guys to start making an effort to get the bugs
fixed joanie doesn't have time for. Some of you are already helping,a nd
I'm extremely greatful. But some of you are not. Before I get yelled at,
I'm only asking for you to do what you're good at. If you can't code, go
file bugs. Write documentation, hang out on irc channels, something. The
perception, and it is real, that the linux accessibility community is
miniscule, consisting only of 10 or so people has ... got ... to ...
stop. If it doesn't, developers will point to that number all day  as a
reason not to put effort into fixing the bugs.
Thanks
Kendell Clark


B. Henry wrote:
> Who's making all this money from linux? 
> Server admins, cloud service providers, and all the businesses that use their servers and cloud services to 
> make big bucks.
> Who's not making moneyu on Linux for the most part are the people designing graphical desktops, maintainers 
> of major distros, and especially not those 
> who develp a bit of FOS software in their spare time or as part of their job.
> Red  Hat has made money for years, but not tons of it. Last I checked Canonical has never turned in a 
> profitable year, and not sure about the Suse 
> folks.
> The people who need to make things accessible are for the most part not getting rich from Linux, and I 
> hardly think that some how obliging Google to 
> send in hit squads  to try and patch up programs after their release is ideal.
> Actually I do agree that some kind of accessibility hit squads can do a lot of good here and there, but 
> Google for instance can argue that for several 
> years they've made an effort to make their products accesible. 
> They were not efficient in doing this, took a long time to get off the ground in most cases, but finally 
> have made some serious progress. 
> The major distro companies should do more and better, but the way Linux and FOS in general at times works 
> is folks use other people's work, and the bits 
> that are inaccessible or badly lacking in accesability in many cases are not under direct control of any 
> particulary distro. 
> So while I agree that something needs to be done, I can only think of a few cases where a major company 
> makiing money has control over inaccessible 
> software. 
> Notable exceptions are Oracle and Dropbox. Dropbox mostly works well, but the installer for Llinux has been 
> broken for a long time when it comes to 
> working with orca.
> There are also many Windows and Mac programs that are not accessible being written everyday. 
> I think most of the change needs to come from much better education regarding universal accessability where 
> ever any kind of programming or I.T. 
> develompent is taught.
> I just don't see how you can try, much less succeed in obligating people who often develop software with 0 
> expectation of making money from it to do 
> right if they do not want to.
> Again, I'm all for working on multiple fronts, and a Linux industry organization dedicated to improving 
> accessibility  is a good idea. 
> Just how you can legislate this is another thing entirely I think.
>