Hi Evan,
Finally a moment for the rest of this thread, or part of it at least.
On Mon, 20 Sep 2021, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
FWIW, I have been using the CANimmunize app
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ca.ohri.immunizeapp> long
before COVID; I have long needed a vaccination passport -- a WHO "yellow
card" which has existed since the 30's
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Certificate_of_Vaccination_or_Prophylaxis>
-- cause I've been to places that won't let you in without a Yellow Fever
shot (as well as protection against a bunch of lesser but still nasty bugs).
Its interface is clunky but it works, and I'll be using it to store my
COVID jab receipts.
That is quite handy for you I would imagine.
As someone who finally gave up and loaded Windows on his laptop after two
decades of fighting with Linux sound systems, battling desktops and
inferior drivers, I'm quite convinced that lack of profile is not the
cause. We've had twenty years of "this is the year of the Linux desktop"
and it now rings extremely hollow, even if you count Chromebooks. Despite
many many years of trying Linux has never risen out of a low-single-digit
percentage of the installed base, and the very-real reasons for this
stagnation are many.
I will have to see if I still have the article, but I found one recently
listing
all of the places where indeed Linux is in use, perhaps under the hood,
but in use all the same.
still, it would likely surprise you just how many access related projects
exist. Windows for many continues to carry quite the access price tag,
the third party things needed to achieve inclusion when working with
windows, depending on the individual, can get close to $10k, and one
still has to deal with problems.
For the developers working in Linux, there is an entire blindness group
for Python for example, the thought was to cut down the cost, while
building in inclusion from the code up...or in theory at least.
the server side the story is totally flipped, but on the desktop Linux is
for enthusiasts, software developers, other power users and not much
beyond.
Again, I respect your experience. still, again, you might be quite
surprised how much energy is spent by individuals who, seeking inclusive
access, and having the background, spend time and energy building Linux
distributions for populations who have been largely ignored by Microsoft,
and who are being stereotyped wrongly by google.
To be sure, as your comment below simply illustrates, a great deal of the
problem is limited public relations.
Personally I think in this case web accessibility issues are in the hands
of the browser maker rather than the OS, anyway.
Evan,
Forgive me if My assumption here is incorrect. Yet your sentence above
suggests you may not fully understand just what is meant by access, or what
adaptive
technology actually provides.
Given some of the other comments, this may get spread out, but let me
start a bit here.
For many, close to a billion according to some sources, adaptive
technology can be a substitution for, or an extension of bodily function.
Hands, ears, eyes, brains, combinations of all of these even.
What that means from the OS standpoint is that, when incorporated well,
one can engage with your computer in an inclusive way, close to, if not
soon after you turn on the machine.
what some sought to do with Linux in fact is provide system information,
from the start, something never achieved in Windows.
To help illustrate, your desktop has keyboard, mouse, monitor, and cp
unit. My personal adaptive combination, while not entirely providing
system boot stuff, does, uniformly interface with my keyboard, providing
as much or as little monitor information I desire, and lets me take care
of my CPU as well...all of that is needful before one even reaches a
browser.
Still, your browser idea might be true if every single site on the entire
web incorporated inclusive design...which of course does not happen. Add
that browsers get broken too. As a simple example Firefox stopped
working with Apple's built-into-the-os screen reader voiceover about a
decade ago. Meaning that for ten years one could not use the browser with
some of apple's fundamental adaptive tools..it took until 2020 before that
started to be fixed. and before you suggest that one can just use
something else, that is not always the case, again because of design.
It can be managed, quite easily actually, but that means choice on the
part of decision makers.
I am drawing largely below from respected UK web consultant
Craig Buckler from his 2017 article on sitepoint.com
https://www.sitepoint.com/author/craig-buckler/
although I am sure he is not the only one to outline the most
inclusive practice for website design.
That practice is known as Progressive Enhancement.
quoting Craig.
"You create the simplest HTML-only experience then enhance it
with images, fonts, CSS and JavaScript when those files
successfully download and execute.
Users can receive a different experience. Those using the latest
Chrome on a desktop may get the highest level of functionality.
Those running Opera Mini on a two year-old mobile may receive a
basic styled page. Importantly, everyone receives something and
the site/app remains usable for everyone."
and important to many experiencing a disability, accommodating
that experience in the fashion best suited for their needs, a
site or application still works for them.
The buzz words are best suited for their needs, not best dictated by
someone who has no daily experience, for that individual, of what
accommodation means.
Anyway, that is a start,
Karen
---
Post to this mailing list [email protected]
Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
