[Accessibility] Draft Mission Statement

Scott McNeil mcneil at freestandards.org
Tue Apr 22 09:35:30 PDT 2003


> > Is it clear that we are referring to free software computer systems,
> > applications, and services, not all computer systems, applications, and
> > services everywhere and on all platforms?  This may be a stupid question on
> > my part....

Not a bad question, let's look at how this is done in the LSB...

The LSB is a *behavioral* standard, meaning that it is

 a. looking for the presence of certain types of libraries
    and commands and

 b. requiring that the interfaces to those libraries and
    commands behave a certain way.

Both operating systems (Linux, UNIX, etc.) and the applications
that run on them can become LSB Certified if they stick to the
behaviors specified in the LSB. Use of a specific kernel, library,
command, etc. is not required. Use of free software is not required
either. However, for an interface to be specified in the LSB there
must be a free software implementation that the LSB can point to.

I'm hoping that this group would follow the same type of framework as
the LSB. The Free Standards Group believe such a framework allows
vendors that are not interested in free software to still be able to
certify against the standards while giving users the freedom to use or
not use free and open source software.

Scott
--
Scott McNeil
Executive Director
Free Standards Group

Bill Haneman wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 2003-04-19 at 09:25, JP Schnapper-Casteras wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >       I vote for #1, although I don't have enormously strong opinion.
> >
> > Something just struck me:  both missions say "universal access to computer
> > systems, applications, and services."
> >
> > Is it clear that we are referring to free software computer systems,
> > applications, and services, not all computer systems, applications, and
> > services everywhere and on all platforms?  This may be a stupid question on
> > my part....
> 
> I think we can reasonably refer to all computer systems here, at least
> in our philosophy.  Just because one promotes a free standard does not
> mean that only free-of-charge or non-commercial systems should use it
> ;-)
> 
> I believe that several proprietary Unix systems are LSB-compliant...
> 
> -Bill
> 
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > --JP
> >
> >
> > Cell: 206-849-9032  |  Personal web page
> > Work: LARS, FDAWG
> > Campaign for Responsible Journalism on Slashdot
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: accessibility-admin at freestandards.org
> > [mailto:accessibility-admin at freestandards.org]On Behalf Of Bill Haneman
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 11:23 AM
> > To: accessibility at freestandards.org
> > Subject: Re: [Accessibility] Draft Mission Statement
> >
> > Two proposed mission statement phrasings are below, as per our meeting
> > today:
> >
> > #1
> > "Our mission is to develop and promote free and open accessibility
> > standards and to make
> > recommendations with respect to the complete software stack as appropriate
> > to enable comprehensive universal access to computer systems, applications,
> > and services."
> > #2
> > "Our mission is to develop and promote free and open accessibility
> > standards within the scope of the Free Standards Group activities and to
> > make
> > recommendations with respect to the complete software stack as appropriate
> > to enable comprehensive universal access to computer systems, applications,
> > and services."
> >
> > Please choose one :-)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Accessibility mailing list
> > Accessibility at freestandards.org
> > http://www.freestandards.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/accessibility
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Accessibility mailing list
> > Accessibility at freestandards.org
> > http://www.freestandards.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/accessibility
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Accessibility mailing list
> Accessibility at freestandards.org
> http://www.freestandards.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/accessibility




More information about the Accessibility mailing list