Willie Walker wrote:
> OK - I'll answer my own question - this approach doesn't seem to do what
> we want.  In testing and testing with this, the problem is that some
> assistive technologies depend upon the existence and value of the key
> itself: if it's not enabled, they let the user know and then enable it.
> I embarassingly know this now because that's what Orca does, and I'm
> pretty sure it's what Gnopernicus does.
>   

GOK does it too :-P

David

> So....
>
> It seems as though the right thing to do is enable accessibility in the
> default schema for development releases.  Anyone have a clue for how to
> do this?
>
> Will
>
> On Fri, 2006-10-27 at 11:12 -0400, Willie Walker wrote:
>   
>> Hi All:
>>
>> This has festered for a little bit without further comment, so I'd like
>> to poke it one more time to try to get this in for the GNOME 2.17.2
>> tarballs.  Please speak up if you disagree and/or don't like the
>> proposed patch (and you have a constructive alternative solution ;-)):
>>
>> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=362457
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Will
>>
>> On Sat, 2006-10-14 at 19:18 -0400, Willie Walker wrote:
>>     
>>> Hi All:
>>>
>>> As part of the GNOME Boston 2006 Accessibility Summit, and as part of
>>> the larger GNOME testing discussions, we would like to propose that
>>> accessibility is enabled by default for GNOME development releases.
>>> That is, make the /desktop/gnome/interface/accessibility gconf setting
>>> be True by default for the "odd" (e.g., 2.17.x) releases.
>>>
>>> A couple of the reasons for doing this include the following:
>>>
>>> o The accessibility infrastructure will be used as part of the larger
>>> testing work.  Having accessibility enabled by default will make it a
>>> little easier to set up and use the testing facilities.  A lower barrier
>>> to entry means more people might be encouraged to test.  ;-)
>>>
>>> o We need broader use and coverage of the accessibility infrastructure.
>>> Having accessibility enabled by default will help provide this.
>>>
>>> When we proposed this idea at the afternoon summary to all of the GNOME
>>> Boston 2006 attendees, the response seemed to be fairly positive.  Jeff
>>> suggested posting a proposal to this list to see if we can get the ball
>>> rolling.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> Will
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> desktop-devel-list mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
>>>       
>
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
>   

_______________________________________________
desktop-devel-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Reply via email to