Re: a11y readiness [was Re: On Documentation]

[Mark McLoughlin <markmc redhat com>]

On Fri, 2004-07-23 at 11:54, Bill Haneman wrote:
> Mark said:
> 
> 
> > 	This is similar to i18n, and to a lesser extent a11y. 
> > [we have] ...for a11y, a sub-project which supports
> > hackers in making their software fully accessible. We don't expect this
> > stuff done upfront, but we do expect that new module maintainers be
> > amenable to working with the sub-projects to get this stuff done in a
> > timely manner.
> 
> I am not sure I agree with Mark's assessment of "not expecting a11y 
> stuff to be done upfront" - 

	(How did I know you'd take issue with this?)

	You'll not that I was saying we shouldn't expect every new module to be
*fully* accessible before being accepted into the desktop. You'll also
note what I said in the mail after that:

> Also, in terms of a11y, similar to requiring new modules to re-use
> already accessible widgets rather than creating custom widgets and
> making sure the software is at least fully navigable using a keyboard.

	I guess my point is that you can only place a certain number of
reasonable requirements on new modules. You cannot require that every
module be fully translated, documented or accessible before considering
its addition to the desktop. You can only expect a certain amount from
any new module - mostly because you cannot expect to have the author of
new modules to have the skills or time to meet those requirements. If
these authors have made a good effort towards these goals and could only
be reasonably expected to make further progress on those goals with the
help of members of the l10n, docs and a11y sub-projects, then its time
we give these people a break and get their cool new stuff in GNOME.

Cheers,
Mark.

P.S - I've a good idea where this conversation will go:

 <billh> | hackers shouldn't need the support of the GAP to make their apps accessible
<markmc> | yes, but unfortunately they do
 <billh> | but we have docs !
<markmc> | yes, but its still H A R D - keynav is hard enough in itself
 <billh> | but !
<markmc> | yes, but ... :-)))