Re: [orca] Re: Some questions regarding Linux accessibility needed for an article in the C'T magazine
Hello,
aaron hewitt, le mer. 11 juin 2025 12:50:34 +0000, a ecrit:
> Gnome is the only option that works with Wayland and Orca, because other
> compositors don't handle global keybindings from other applications.
Yes, that is a common concern. Previously Wayland environments had no
way for Orca to define shortcuts etc. Recently it was introduced in the
compositor used by gnome. But the work remains to be done in other
compositors as well.
> Some of the biggest names in the Linux desktop space, Primarily Ubuntu, are
> making accessibility actively worse by migrating to semi-accessible installers
Such comment allows to think that Ubuntu developers are breaking
accessibility on purpose.
I have never seen such kind of thing.
But what happens all the time is that some people contribute some
accessibility feature, but do not document it that much, and do not
integrate it into the standard testing process. Thus things break,
that's only common in nowadays' computer ecosystem. What is needed for
sustained accessibility support is to make sure that testing it is part
of the general development, e.g.
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianInstaller/Accessibility
which is followed by debian installer people to check that they didn't
break it.
Storm Dragon, le mer. 11 juin 2025 14:32:42 -0400, a ecrit:
> Also, there is a new project with the aim of keeping Xorg alive and well called xlibre:
> https://github.com/X11Libre/xserver
Don't hold on your breath on this project. For now it's apparently
a single-person thing (if you can see them, there are graphs on
https://github.com/X11Libre/xserver/graphs/contributors that make it
very clear). If it attracts people, that would only mean splitting
the maintenance workforce between Xorg and Xlibre, so not a good
thing longtermwise. metux apparently did a lot of changes to the code
structure, which will make porting fixes from one to the other way more
difficult. That's just active balkanization.
Samuel
Reply to: