Joe, Respectfully, when quoting a section of my post that you are responding to, please quote the entire section. Because the key point of that sentence (which you did cut off) is that none of it would happen "absent of our urging".
As much as I am a fan of quantitative methods, such a benchmark of evaluating "glacial" is not necessary. The expectation is not that iTunes be made accessible inside of a month (if that's what you are asking). But it was reasonable to expect it within 18 months. And it's not just about iTunes, it's other applications as well. If the problem with me and several members of this board has in some way been due to a misunderstanding of my position, I would only wish that others would do as you have, inquire as to my point of view, rather than telling me what it is. But I was certain I made it clear. I don't think that accessibility is a priority for Apple, or any mainstream company. Barring Steve Jobs's mention of voiceover at WWDC, one must realize that the company is a Microcosm of a society that is incapable of empathizing with the plight of the blind or disabled for that matter. That is why we enact laws that compel such companies to finally pay attention to our needs. And as they are doing so, we should be the ones to rebuke them for their failures, and commend their good work. There has been enough praise of Apple's good work. But the minute someone of this board posts a valid criticism, they are chastised, and that is deplorable. Thank you, and take care... Abdul -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kafka's Daytime Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 3:22 AM To: General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS X by theblind Subject: Re: iTunes' Inaccessibility and VoiceOver On Sep 24, 2006, at 11:56 PM, Abdul Kamara wrote: > Apple will not > ensure that it's operating system is accessible to us, much less its > flag ship applications and that I'm assuming you meant to say Apple will not ensure that [remaining portions of the OS not already made accessible] will not be made accessible? And is it the operating system that is not generally accessible or do we have a number of applications (including some flagship apps) which have not been updated to take full advantage of VoiceOver/ Accessibility API? I realize, in practice, this might seem an incidental distinction...but the distinction matters in the context of this particular discussion. > making excuses for its glacial pace is counter productive. Glacial compared to what though? i.e. what's the benchmark? Since the API-based, OS-integrated accessibility approach is a first I'm not sure what you're comparing to. If you are making a scientific comparison your method (and its specifics) would be a very valuable thing to share as it could help establish some reasonable timelines/ expectations for continued accessibility development of/on the Mac OS. This, of course, would be much better than expectations which are arbitrary, culturally motivated, or based on what we know generally of software development cycles. In making comparisons, establishing some reasonable timelines...it would also seem we might want to distinguish between various types of development. I'm not sure it's reasonable to lump all of Mac OS accessibility into a single "Apple ensuring it's OS is accessible to us" category. We have application development (both Apple and third parties) which must occur and there are also the VO/OS adjustments which would occur separately, be completed by different teams, have different dependencies (both business and technical), etc. Finally, respectfully, you seem to be taking a particularly dire view of the current state of accessibility on the Mac and its future. I do think you have explained more or less why you don't personally feel particularly encouraged (understatement) by Apple's accessibility efforts. If there is confusion about your few postings I think that confusion is rooted in a mostly collective failure to understand what you intend...what is motivating your postings? Are you telling the community that not enough is being done and the community must be more vocal? Are you trying to motivate legal action? An explanation of what it is you are hoping to accomplish would likely clear up some of the confusion and help the slower folks like me catch up. Joe
