Speakup in kernel

[Janina Sajka]

Jonathan Blandford writes:
> From: Jonathan Blandford <jrb at redhat.com>
> 
> Janina Sajka <janina at rednote.net> writes:
> 
> > Oh, it's clear RH has no intention. What is now also clear is that the
> > reasoning is highly suspect. In fact, prejudicial against persons with
> > disabilities. Not hard to make that case from this thread.
> 
> That's not fair, Janina -- we care a lot about making Linux accessible.
> I was disappointed too to see speakup not make Fedora Core, but I've
> seen the kernel team on this list consistently complain about the
> implementation of that patch.  I don't feel particularly qualified to
> tell the kernel guys here what is and isn't good code, and have to defer
> to them.

If I've been unfair, I am sorry for that. Nor do I intend to suggest
that Red Hat is against accessibility, because I don't think that is the
case.

But your point about expertise also supports my position. Being an
expert in kernel coding does not make one an expert in accessibility.
Frankly, having a disability doesn't qualify one either because all
people with disabilities are not the same and have very different needs
and abilities.

So I would agree that fair means respecting expertise. I would think it
also means applying criteria equitably and consistently. Without
revisiting the details, it's this that got me on my soapbox, because I
see very different standards across several issues, some of which I've
documented (and which have not been answered). 

You say the kernel team were unhappy with the Speakup patch. Yet, it
transpires in cc's of mail since yesterday, that the author of Speakup
never received any communication from Red Hat about it. Which brings me
to my last point about fair. Fair is not about reading each others
minds.

Some weeks ago when the issue was newt, we heard that our Bugzilla
reports were insufficiently documented. Doesn't fair require the same
from Red Hat? Speakup was in 8.0 and then it was pulled. It's now also
absent from the updated kernels for 8.0. But nobody bothered to make
sure that Red Hat's concerns were documented properly and successfully
delivered. That's not fair in my book.


> 
> They are right on one aspect though -- this patch really needs to make
> it upstream.  We would never accept the current GNOME Accessibility
> framework as a patch.  Like most similarly-sized endeavors, it took a
> long time to get it fully integrated in GNOME, but it was definitely
> worth the effort as every distribution shipping GNOME gets imporved
> Accessibility support "for free."
> 
> -Jonathan
> 
> 
> --
> fedora-test-list mailing list
> fedora-test-list at redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list

-- 
	
Janina Sajka
Email: janina at rednote.net		
Phone: (202) 408-8175

Director, Technology Research and Development
American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)
http://www.afb.org

Chair, Accessibility Work Group
Free Standards Group
http://accessibility.freestandards.org