* Dennis Payne [2021-05-08 21:40]:
> On Sat, 2021-05-08 at 20:52 +0300, Jean Louis wrote:
> > * Dennis Payne [2021-05-08 19:20]:
> > > Connecting at a lower level would probably give worse results. For
> > > Gnome software for example, I don't believe they write text using
> > > the X
> > > Windows functions. Instead they handle that themselves and send the
> > > image result to X. Additionally X Windows is generally on the way
> > > out
> > > with Wayland being the new thing.
> >
> > I get it.
> >
> > But I don't think that blind users would like to switch to bleeding
> > edge software.
>
> RHEL, Fedora, and Ubuntu use Wayland right now. X Windows is basically
> in maintenance mode. The proposal I was referencing suggested moving
> the accessibility layer lower in the X windows stack. If you started
> working on that now, it probably wouldn't matter because X Windows will
> have a small market share. (If it even worked which as I said is
> unlikely because of the way libraries make use of X Windows.)
>
> But if you think you can do better, I'd be happy to be proven wrong. I
> just don't think Wayland is bleeding edge anymore.
Maybe I used wrong word, I use X.org not the original X Window
System.
I fully understand your proposal, I wish it could be so how you
explained it. I would bring it even more down to underlying functions
in the kernel as well. Speech system should be embedded
fundamentally.
Anything that is displayed on the screen should have capability to be
spoken out, including kernel messages, just anything. Just any output
of text should have possibility to be tracked by the operating
system so that speech functions may be enabled or disabled.
A screen reader should not be just an application, it should be
fundamental part of the operating system with the API so that various
other software may re-use the text.
As there is huge software there is no standard that I know how OS
should be defined in the terms of accessibility.
I think that both text readers and speech recognition should be
built-in.
RHEL, Fedora and Ubuntu are not fully free operating systems, so that
is first thing that I look upon when choosing about them. When
contributing, first is to contribtue to free software distributions as
here listed:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html
From:
https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html
,
| Ubuntu maintains specific repositories of nonfree software, and
| Canonical expressly promotes and recommends nonfree software under the
| Ubuntu name in some of their distribution channels. Ubuntu offers the
| option to install only free packages, which means it also offers the
| option to install nonfree packages too. In addition, the version of
| Linux, the kernel, included in Ubuntu contains firmware blobs.
`
--
Jean
Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns
Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/
https://rms-support-letter.github.io/
___
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
