Re: KDE and AT-SPI

[Olaf Jan Schmidt <ojschmidt kde org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

[Bill Haneman, Donnerstag, 16. September 2004 14:32]
> Our first order of business is getting what we have, working.

Sure. This is why the Qt-ATK bridge has higher priority for us than 
solving the client side issue.

But I object to officially calling AT-SPI a standard before a solution for 
KDE/Qt-based AT clients is agreed on.

> When the Linux/GNOME accessibility infrastructure was being developed,
> and when the Linux Accessibility Working Group meeting recommended
> embracing the GNOME architecture as our standard, DBUS did not exist.
>

I don't know which "Linux Accessibility Working Group" you mean. The KDE 
project is not a member of it, unless you mean the FSG Accessibility 
Workgroup.

> I agree that in the future alternative implementations of our IDL and
> protocols should be actively explored.

I am cc'ing the FAG Accessibility Workgroup chair: Can changes to the 
protocols be discussed, or was there a recommendation to use AT-SPI as it 
is and only to discuss "alternative implementations"?

As far as I know, the KDE representatives in the FSG Accessibility 
Workgroup have not agreed to any recommendations for or against using 
CORBA or DBUS for AT-SPI. AT-SPI is on the roadmap for FSG Accessibility, 
but I understood that no formal decision has been made, and that changes 
to AT-SPI can still be discussed. If the GNOME Accessibility Project has 
a different opinion, then please state so clearly.


At the Unix Accessibility Forum, we informally talked about possible 
changes to AT-SPI (including D-BUS) with GNOME developers. I had the 
impression that the GNOME Accessibility Project is very interested in 
cooperating with us and discussing some changes that might be needed to 
move AT-SPI towards a standard embraced by both KDE and GNOME.

Bill, when we met at FOSDEM, I had the strong feeling that making 
accessibility on Unix working is a dream shared by both of us.
I was also very impressed by the friendly way you helped us finding 
solutions for ALS. When writing emails, it is far easier to misunderstand 
each other, especially when one misinterprets the purpose of questions 
and stated facts. When reading the mail I am replying to, I had the 
impression that you wanted to say: "The decision for CORBA is made. We 
can discuss your implementation, but no changes that would mean changes 
on our side." I am frustrated and disappointed to hear this position, but 
maybe I totally misunderstood you.

Olaf

- -- 
Olaf Jan Schmidt, KDE Accessibility Project
KDEAP co-maintainer, maintainer of http://accessibility.kde.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkFJjGUACgkQoLYC8AehV8fu2gCdHIDvNi8TLHzwe6YLknEAMm3p
6VUAoLssBIk4x/enwR7JLZUBlDNXE3mk
=AAlD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----