Re: GNOME Launches Campaign for Accessibility

> 
> cox: In my opinion, the separation of responsibilities is the main reason
> for lack of a11y progress in GTK.  If any of the wonderful people
> working on a11y  that we are both fans of were able to commit patches
> to GTK, the issues would have been resolved years ago.
> 
cdh: Can Brian or someone related to Gnome Foundation explain the process for getting a11y fixes upstream? As Bill says and I agree that a bunch of a11y volunteers would be interested in making changes to GTK+ if they had confidence that their remedies would make it into the main branch.

cdh: Is there a document describing the process for volunteer hackers to ensure that their fixes, once approved, make it upstream?


> cox: Because several e-mails on this topic have attacked my emotional
> response to my patch to pixmap objects being rejected, I want to
> explain my philosophy about GUI objects and a11y.  If an object is
> going to be displayed on the screen, I feel extremely strongly that
> the programmer using that object should have the opportunity to attach
> a text description to that object.  Not only does pixmap not allow
> this, but GTK uses pixmap objects in all lists, tables, and tree
> displays, which is why no icon in any list, table, or tree in any
> single GTK program says anything other than "icon".  Any programmer
> who takes the time to examine how GTK programs are typically written
> can come to any conclusion other than pixmap objects are a fundamental
> core object, used just about everywhere, and that the programmers
> using them are not to blame for not making accessible descriptions.
> GTK doesn't allow it.
> 
cdh: I would take this a step further and say that GTK+ should not just support but require text descriptions for all UI objects. Sure, a programmer can put nonsense in the text description field but, as users get nothing better than nonsense now, any programmers who added any text descriptions whatsoever would be a win.

Happy Hacking,
cdh