[Accessibility] Goal of AT-SPI inclusion of AT-SPI

Olaf Schmidt ojschmidt at kde.org
Wed Nov 8 11:14:53 PST 2006


Hi!

These are some thoughts on possible ways to include AT-SPI in LSB, and their 
problems and benefits

1. Make full working AT-SPI support mandatory for all distributions, i.e. the 
necessary CORBA ABI (or DBUS ABI) must be provided and the general system 
(window manager, desktop, panel, menu) must support it
Advantages:
* AT-SPI is not considered optional
* AT-SPI is guaranteed to fully work on a conforming distribution
Disadvantages:
* We have to delay it until a solution for KDE is complete and shipped by all 
distributions (since we cannot lock out KDE-based distributions from the LSB)

2. Make it mandatory that the AT-SPI libraries are included, but do not 
require any shipped applications to make use of them
Advantages:
* No delay
* AT-SPI is not considered optional
* AT-SPI supporting applications are guaranteed to work with assistive 
technologies
Disadvantages:
* The general system can still be inaccessible on a conforming distribution
* It would be more difficult distributions 

3. Create a separate module for CORBA-AT-SPI
Advantages:
* No delay
* AT-SPI is guaranteed to fully work on a distribution that chooses to comply 
with the module
Disadvantages:
* AT-SPI could be considered "optional"

If we go for a separate module, then we need to be careful not to name 
it "Accessibility", since some accessibility aspects are independent of 
AT-SPI.

Olaf




More information about the Accessibility mailing list