On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Donald Whytock <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: >> In any case, the parent post is about mission and goals, not >> collecting bug reports. I assume you have objections to accessibility >> as a project goal. > > Maybe stressing flexibility and extensibility rather than > accessibility, in terms of AOO being sufficiently flexible and > extensible that accessibility options can be attached to it? More > importantly, flexible and extensible in the way that > That-which-should-not-be-named isn't?
It is both, really. There is the core accessibility work that was done to OpenOffice. For example, enabling keyboard navigation, the work to implement the accessibility improvements in ODF 1.1 and ODF 1.2. That included adding UI for enabling descriptive text on more kinds of graphics, native table support in Impress, etc. These improvements don't rely on any extension. A good summary is this old OOoCon presentation: http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/ooocon2006/presentations/wednesday_o4.pdf And then, in addition to core accessibility work, there are the additional accessibility-related output formats enabled by extensions. So I think we have a good story here. And it will get only better as we merge in the additional accessibility work done in Symphony. -Rob
