Re: Panel Status - GNOME 2.0

[Sander Vesik <Sander Vesik sun com>]

On Sat, 17 Nov 2001, Bill Haneman wrote:

> Sander Vesik wrote:
> 
> 
> > The prority of having a p[anel is far more higher than having an
> > accessible panel, so all accessability work on panel should be postponed
> > unril after such time as we have a working panel and people can work on
> > aplets (panel is blocking work on them).
> 
> I disagree with Sander here, at least the "far more" part.  If we don't
> address accessibility in the panel *now*, it won't get addressed, and
> without an accessible panel then Gnome-2 accessibility is basically a
> lie from the end-user perspective.  Though we can add accessibility to
> most apps and non-core toolkits later, we need for that accessibility
> which will be coming on line in the Gnome2 timeframe to work *with the
> gnome2 platform*.
> 

I'm not sure I follow - how is not having a real panel in gnome2 (and
using a pretty much ad-hoc launcher) better than having a panel that
while maybe not completely accessible can be made to be so?

> We don't want to require, say, a "panel patch" in order to use assistive
> technologies with Gnome 2, and we can't afford to wait for 2.2 in order
> to have at least the panel and control center accessible.  As Telsa
> pointed out, expectations for accessibility in Gnome 2 are very high.
> 
> I think that it is already a problem to ship any inaccessible bits with
> the so-called "core" gnome2, though we have conceded that such will be
> the case.  To ship an inaccessible panel seems to me totally at odds
> with the Board's assertion that accessibility is a key part of Gnome 2.
>