[Accessibility] December 4, 2003 Draft Minutes

[Bill Haneman]

John Goldthwaite wrote:

>That's a great idea and should be emphasized in the NSF request.
>Generalizing AT/SPI should also be a area for research funding.
>
Just to clarify - at-spi is already generalized and exists and runs on 
non-Linux systems - for instance
Solaris, FreeBSD, MacOSX (at least in part), and possibly other 
operating systems.  In fact, parts of the accessibility work are 
available for Windows, thanks to the porting efforts of others.

I agree with Peter that we should not use the word 'Linux' on its own in 
descriptions of our work or minutes, unless we are specifically 
referring to issues affecting Linux only.

- Bill

>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Peter Korn [mailto:Peter.Korn at Sun.COM]
>Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 10:50 PM
>To: john.goldthwaite at catea.org
>Cc: 0 Accessibility Linux List
>Subject: Re: [Accessibility] December 4, 2003 Draft Minutes
>
>
>Hi John, gang,
>
>John Goldthwaite wrote:
>  
>
>>December 4, 2003 Draft Minutes Linux Accessibility workgroup
>>    
>>
>
>In discussions I had with Janina about the press release, we agreed that the
>Free Standards Group and the accessibility effort weren't limited to Linux.
>  For example, we intend for Sun Solaris to support the standards, and I
>expect IBM would consider implementing them in AIX (and HP in HP/UX).
>Likewise we've talked about making the standards OS-neutral enough for
>potential adoption by Apple in OS X.
>
>So... I suggest even at the minutes level we not limit this workgroup to
>"Linux".
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Peter
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Accessibility mailing list
>Accessibility at freestandards.org
>http://www.freestandards.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/accessibility
>  
>