Re: Straw man agenda

[Bill Haneman <Bill Haneman Sun COM>]

Brian Cameron wrote:

> Willie:
>
> This agenda looks good, but here are some things I'd like to see more
> focus on:
>
> + There are many a11y components, and it seems like not many people
>   understand some of them.  java-access-bridge, the registry daemon,
>   etc.  It would be nice to get an overview of how all the components
>   fit together, 
I intend to focus on the above in my intro slot. 

> and how to approach mapping a bug to the responsible
>   component, and how to debug each component.
>  
That would probably be a useful topic too, if we can find time somewhere.

> + I think a *lot* of a11y bugs are really the same sort of problems
>   that you see over and over again.  Programs that do not have
>   accessible labels for widgets, for example.  Perhaps it would be
>   useful to pick a few bugs that are examples of the common a11y bugs
>   that exist and do an exercise where we demonstrate the bug (how to
>   see that the bug exists), and then actually fix the bug.  Probably
>   lots of these kinds of bugs are simple 1-line fixes, and if we showed
>   people that it is actually easy to identify and fix these sorts of
>   bugs (if you know how), then perhaps we would find more community
>   involvement in getting these sorts of issues addressed.
>  
I believe our current documents address these issues in some detail (see 
the various articles posted in
http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gap/Testing and on the intro GAP 
page); a good question would be how to better highlight the existance of 
those documents and improve them.

> I think it would be more useful to have two tracks instead of just one.
> One track for people interested in doing development in a11y and
> one for people interested in making their application(s) better support
> a11y.  I think only people interested in doing active a11y development
> would be interested in current a11y gaps.  Probably most people's time
> would be better spent helping to get them to understand how to get more
> involved with fixing existing bugs, and what they should be doing to
> make sure their applications are reasonably accessible.  If we only do
> 1 track, I think we should minimze the time we spend talking about
> future pie-in-the-sky things when there is so much work to do just
> getting what already has been implemented to actually work.  I think
> this is perhaps the most important thing, and isn't reflected at all
> in your 3-bullet breakdown of the day...
>  
I empathize with your point but there do seem to be different 
perspectives about what the a11y summit should be about.  I am not sure 
that a tutorial focus is in line with what the contributors to the a11y 
summit wiki have posted so far.

I think such a track would be a great thing to have at GUADEC 2007 
however...

regards

Bill

> >     * What do we have?
> >     * What do we need?
> >     * How do we get there?
>
> Brian
>
>
>  
>
> > After consideration of all the suggestions from the community (THANKS!),
> > I've put together a straw man agenda for the Accessibility Summit for
> > October 8, 2006, as part of the GNOME Boston 2006 Summit:
> >
> >    http://live.gnome.org/Boston2006/AccessibilitySummit
> >
> >
> > The agenda is still up for discussion, so please send your comments.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Will
> > (Your happy chair)
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > gnome-accessibility-list mailing list
> > gnome-accessibility-list gnome org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
> >    
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-accessibility-list mailing list
> gnome-accessibility-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
>