[Kde-accessibility] resend: Re: KDE and AT-SPI [was: Re: Is it the time for "KSpeach"?]

[Bill Haneman]

On Wed, 2004-09-15 at 19:16, Aaron Seigo wrote:

> except that the overwhelming majority of desktop applications don't
need a 
> "truly object oriented, network capable object protocol" of the
magnitude of 
> CORBA. 

Maybe.  But accessibility does, at least if you want to support more
than just GNOME/KDE apps written with C/C++ running on a single, local
machine.

> has this ever been a useful asset in terms of accessability and ATK in
> particular to date? theoretical benefits don't really count, but if it
has 
> proved useful, bully.

Yes; OpenOffice uses the Java ORB for its accessibility, as do all
Java/Swing apps on GNOME.  Oracle uses Java/Swing as its means of
deploying a number of accessible applications for users with
disabilities, and there are other real-world examples.  In the workplace
this can be a significant thing.

> DBUS will likely give us interoperability this same interoperability
in a 
> right-size container. i agree that we shouldn't jump projects such as
the 
> accessability frameworks onto it until it is Ready(tm), but i do think
it is 
> useful to understand why DBUS is needed and to state "these are the N
bullet 
> points we need covered for it to be useful for us". this is how we can
work 
> towards unified, useful technologies =)

I don't have any problem with making DBUS better.  But better in this
way means bigger.  So an alternate path would be to keep CORBA/ORBit2
for the tasks that needs industrial-strength "Object Request Brokerage",
and keep DBUS lean and mean.  This would mean of course that DBUS would
not be the one hammer for every nail...

- Bill

> -- 
> Aaron J. Seigo
> Society is Geometric
> _______________________________________________
> kde-accessibility mailing list
> kde-accessibility at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-accessibility