El día 23 de enero de 2012 21:28, Joanmarie Diggs <[email protected]> escribió: > Hi Félix.
Hi Joanmarie! Really thank you for taking some time here! > On Sun, 2012-01-22 at 18:55 +0100, J. Félix Ontañón wrote: >> Hi again. Please find in the following link the refered document, >> both in editable and printable format.t both in english and spanish. >> >> http://fontanon.org/gnomea11ycaseAndalusia.zip > > If it is decided that your proposed document is worthy of inclusion > on any GNOME site and/or distribution elsewhere, I would encourage > you to do the following: Of course, all your suggestions will be really appreciated: > Proofread the English content. I sympathize *completely* with the work > required to write a document in a language other than your own. That's > why I get my Spanish colleagues (several of them) to review anything I > write in Spanish. As the document hasn't been published elsewhere, you can take this as a Draft. I considered to look for the help of better english speakers than me. Finally I declined before knowing if the document is useful for someone. It's not so easy to task anyone to review a 19 document. > You have the bold-text statement "A very important part of the project > was several improvements on GNOME desktop accessibility by adding new > features and applications that previously didn't exists." From my read, > that seems to suggest that new GNOME applications were created as part > of this project and upstreamed by GNOME. If so that's great, but... > which GNOME applications were created exactly? If the answer is "none," > I would rephrase your bolded text to be more clear about what work was > completed where. The point is that even in the original spanish text it slightly seems to mean that. It needs to be rephrased, absoutely. > I think it would be worthwhile to distinguish the features which were > upstreamed and verified as working from those which are downstream-only > and/or unverified. For instance: In fact, the document is more focused on being interesing (and encouraging) for deployers than developers. Do you think to distinguish wherer a feature was added or not it's really needed? > * There is no "keyboard profile similar to JAWS" in Orca. Not in upstream, but at least it was developed for the project. > * Whatever work was done to achieve "seamless integration with > Voxin" was presumably not required by Orca -- either that or > it's downstream only. Agree. > * GNOME Voice Control is not a GNOME module and is for all intents > and purposes dead. [1] Yes, and it's a real pity, but the work was done, deployed in the telecenter network and upstreamed anyway: http://svn.berlios.de/viewcvs/festlang/trunk/gnome-voice-control/ChangeLog?revision=359&view=markup > * In theory the Evince improvements were done and upstreamed; in > practice I have never been able to get any accessibility out of > Evince. Ditto for Orca users from a variety of distros. As far > as we are concerned, Evince remains inaccessible. :( Oh! Don't know about that. To be honest, i'm being really confused here ... how should I refer at that point in the document? > I'd also be sure that improvements provided were listed in the right > place. For instance, does Dots (a braille translator) really now have an > improvement of "Reading scanned text with Orca"?? > > It might be worth distinguishing which companies and contributors did > what. Amongst other things, I thought Fernando Herrera did the Dots > work; not Warp. Likewise, I'd not combine company names with slashes > without first checking with the companies being paired in this fashion. Both them are real "bugs" on the document. Thanks for catching them. As for the company names or contributors, I feel both could be skipped. I don't feel this data interesting for deployers. What do you think? >> This study case shows how Andalusia regional gov. choosed Gnome >> Desktop for setting up accessible workstations at their telecenter >> network. > > Case studies, as I understand them, are more research-based. As such, > I would expect anything with that title to not just promote work, but > to also analyze the processes involved in bringing that work to fruition > -- both the successes as well as the failures. Thus I would suggest that > you find a different descriptor/title. Well, it's a matter of what do you understand for a Case study. I accept your suggestion. Do you find "GNOME Accessibility and Andalusian Telecenters - A Success Story of the Guadalinfo Accesible project" as a better title? > Take care. > --joanie, Orca Project Lead Best regards! > [1] https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/festlang-gvc/2011-May/thread.html > -- J. Félix Ontañón Carmona Manager Emergya Consultoría -- marketing-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
