getting orca included in gnome 2.16

[Steven Kannel]

Hello,

As a visually impaired user of Linux, I would be willing to test and compare
LSR and Orca.

I would agree regarding the issue of setting a default screen reader.  As a
visually impaired user of a few distributions of Linux it is nice to see
some consistency regarding default settings.

Sincerely,

Steven Kannel

-----Original Message-----
From: Jason Grieves [mailto:jasongrieves at hotmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 4:35 AM
To: 'Kris Van Hees'; 'Henrik Nilsen Omma'; janina at rednote.net
Cc: ubuntu-accessibility at lists.ubuntu.com; georgeluc at vt.edu; 'Steven Kannel'
Subject: RE: getting orca included in gnome 2.16

Hello,

Although I understand your concern in setting defaults it is often
necessary, especially in the accessibility community to offer an accessible
solution by default.  Otherwise the user is left with nothing to begin!  

An example is a blind friend of mine who uses the Microsoft Narrator to
install JAWS.  He first flips on Narrator to get around the default desktop
and prepare whatever he needs to and then installs JAWS.  Microsoft
thankfully has included a default tool for the visually impaired.  If we as
a community do not install anything, it is likely that the disabled user
cannot install the tool himself!  It is vital that we chose a default tool
which is usable and accessible.  The rests of the accessibility tools should
then be easily installed, just like every other package in the ubuntu and
linux community!  That is what makes Linux a very unique and fun solution.

On the other end we have to be very careful about when we change the default
settings.  For example a blind user may try Ubuntu after using gnopernicus
for a couple of years and find himself at a default install with Orca at
his/her side.  A sighted user can typically "see" enough to go grab another
email client or change the web browser, but disabled users might not have
that luxury.  It is thus up to the community and developers to attempt to
set defaults that are of course the most usable and accessible to the end
users.  This is a very important rule when developing large scale
applications and operating systems.

With that said I have talked to some friends about the Linux screen reader.
They feel that LSR is comparable to Orca currently, and will surpass it in
the future.  The difference lies in the scripting capability.  Although both
screen readers will surpass Gnopernicus, LSR provides a higher abstraction
than Orca.  Orca relies heavily on the at-spi layer, and if that layer
changes, the majority of its scripts will break.  However the LSR scripts
that users make should be fine, with a couple of touchups to lower levels of
the code.

I have not tested or investigated this matter for myself, but I believe it
is essential for a blind member in our community to step up and take the
challenge.  I would be willing to work with them on investigating the
products, but I am not blind and do not use a screen reader for daily tasks.


Lets find a middle ground on this issue of "defaults."  We obviously do not
want to just pick a new product because its new and throw it at our users.
At the same time we must provide the most accessible solution out of the box
for the users.  

Sincerely,

Jason Grieves

-----Original Message-----
From: gnome-accessibility-list-bounces at gnome.org
[mailto:gnome-accessibility-list-bounces at gnome.org] On Behalf Of Kris Van
Hees
Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2006 2:38 PM
To: Henrik Nilsen Omma
Cc: speakup at braille.uwo.ca; Orca screen reader developers;
blinux-list-bounces at redhat.com; FSG Accessibility; ma-linux at tux.org;
gnome-accessibility-list at gnome.org
Subject: Re: getting orca included in gnome 2.16

On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 08:01:00PM +0100, Henrik Nilsen Omma wrote:
> Janina Sajka wrote:
> >Mike Pedersen writes:
> >>We have been informed, however, that there can be only one screen
> >>reader/magnifier in the GNOME desktop.
> >>    
> >That's a rather outrageous attitude. Who made that decision?
> >
> >Are they also prepared to have only one web browser? ONly one media
> >player? ONly one word processor? Only one email client application?
> >  
> I think you may have misinterpreted this slightly. The idea is that 
> there will only be one official screen reader in Gnome, as there indeed 
> is only one email client (Evolution), one browser (Epiphany), one office 
> suite (gnome office, using abiword and gnumeric). Distributions can, and 
> do, change these defaults and users can install a whole range of options.

Not to start a holy war, but a reasonable part of the audience that believes
in
an alternative to Microsoft Windows also supports the notion of *not*
including
various other applications and suites.  While Gnome is surely not an OS, it
seems rather weird (and potentially dangerous) to me to end up with a
situation
where Gnome has an official screen reader, an official mail client, etc...
By including specific official applications and suites in Gnome, you're
bound
to get into a situation where a large group of people will end up simply
sticking to the officially included applications and suites, either by
choice
(easier) or as mandated by an IT department that takes the "we only run the
officially included stuff" approach (all too comon).

And in the end... why not simply leave Gnome to be the desktop environment
it
is, and let users choose what they want?  Why does there need to be one
official choice, and optional alternatives?  I can see where the general
public
falls for this, and how from a "let's pretend the user is stupid"
perspective
this can be considered "user-friendly", but I would hope that we (as a
special
interest group) can express a genuine concern about this type of policy to
the powers that be (and that make this type of policy).

	Kris
_______________________________________________
gnome-accessibility-list mailing list
gnome-accessibility-list at gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list