From kde-accessibility Thu Aug 31 10:58:23 2006 From: Olaf Jan Schmidt Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 10:58:23 +0000 To: kde-accessibility Subject: Re: [Kde-accessibility] Orca/KDE Integration Message-Id: <200608311258.24182.ojschmidt () kde ! org> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-accessibility&m=115702101807221 Hi Bill! [ Bill Haneman ] > >I removed the first possibility, since the extention of Qt Accessibility > > has already been made. > > Well, I disagree with that. We should list all possibilities even if > some decisions seem to have been made, otherwise I don't think we can > have a clear discussion about the decision making process. If #1 has been > rejected, it should still be discussed and the reasons for rejecting it > documented in the Wiki. I listed the reasons in the section of background facts: * The work to extend Qt Accessibility has already been made. * Qt Accessibility is portable. I could add: * All KDE widgets are subclasses of Qt widgets and inherit Qt Accessibility support. * Qt Accessibility offers everything that we need for AT-SPI support, so it doesn't seem to make sense implementing atk support twice. But I am probably missing something here. What exactly would be the technical difference between #1 and #2? Olaf -- Olaf Jan Schmidt, KDE Accessibility co-maintainer, open standards accessibility networker, Protestant theology student and webmaster of http://accessibility.kde.org/ and http://www.amen-online.de/ _______________________________________________ kde-accessibility mailing list kde-accessibility@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-accessibility