Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

For software that is cross platform and accessible, forget about Qt

blind.guru

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 86 posts

Re: For software that is cross platform and accessible, forget about Qt

#31

Post by rbehrends »

bjpbakker wrote: post #25
Brakenshire wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> IMO it is understandable that fixing some piece of proprietary software is not a top priority. I believe it's more appropriate for the author to rant against JAWS for not caring about QT, than the other way around. Worth pointing out, JAWS is proprietary, but it is also very widely used. I'd imagine its user-base is many, many times that of NVDA (which is the open source equivalent).

Yeah sorry about that. Maybe "some" seems a bit too careless. Not intended that way. Substituting it for "the most popular proprietary screen-reader software" still doesn't change anything on my opinion though :)

It is not a realistic option for an author of accessible software to ignore JAWS. Obviously, open source software has no obligation to support accessibility, but that means that it'll be used less (this does not just affect visually impaired people, but also organizations and companies that have a need or obligation to keep their systems accessible; ADA compliance, for starters).

So, yes, open source programmers are perfectly within their rights to ignore that audience, and that audience is perfectly within its rights to not use open source software that doesn't meet their accessibility needs and to warn others and advocate against the use of such software.

Re: For software that is cross platform and accessible, forget about Qt

#32

Post by distances »

ktta wrote: post #21
oblio wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are the things that are super low priority for commercial projects, and those don't usually want to leave money on the table. They're super low priority for OSS. If I recall correctly Sun paid a long time ago for usability and accessibility studies for GTK 2 and Gnome 2. And I'd guess most of their work was thrown way during the transition to GTK 3/Gnome 3 (somebody can correct me on this, I'm not really certai…

The link is interesting. Looks like it checks for the HN's user logged in cookie and redirects to imgur.

No, it's checking the referrer. Cookies can't of course be read by other sites, that would break everything.

Re: For software that is cross platform and accessible, forget about Qt

#33

Post by dom0 »

slifin wrote: post #17
Asooka wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe because it's easier to solve the immediate problem by writing the UI in the target platform's native fully-accessible toolkit and dropping support for platforms that don't have one. That said, I suspect the easiest solution nowadays would be writing your UI in electron, or the Gecko-based project that was announced a week or so ago (sorry, I can't remember the name).

I use a lot of accessibility apis indirectly for keyboard navigation, on macos Shortcat cannot find any elements to click inside Google Chrome or VSCode which makes me wonder if either Shortcat has a bug or Google Chrome is not exposing those elements through the accessibility api. Makes me hesitate to assume Electron apps are accessible by default

> I use a lot of accessibility apis indirectly for keyboard navigation

Many cycles ago I wrote a tool which brought Unity-like menu search to Windows, and also used the accessibility API to do this (IAccessible, I think). Even back then there were many apps which didn't expose anything there, even from MSFT.

Re: For software that is cross platform and accessible, forget about Qt

#34

Post by CJefferson »

tinalumfoil wrote: post #24
mb720 wrote: post #15

I get that the author is frustrated with false claims about Qt, but calling people working on open source software "hippie coders" is just an insulting misrepresentation harming any rational debate.

I think ive read enough LKML to realize name calling doesn't slow software development and free software devs can handle being told off once in a while.

I left GCC development after being ranted at. You just see the people who hang around.

Re: For software that is cross platform and accessible, forget about Qt

#35

Post by Sean1708 »

mb720 wrote: post #15

I get that the author is frustrated with false claims about Qt, but calling people working on open source software "hippie coders" is just an insulting misrepresentation harming any rational debate.

Plus it's a pretty big leap from "I can't use my favourite screen-reader" to "blind people can't use open source".

Re: For software that is cross platform and accessible, forget about Qt

#36

Post by mb720 »

tinalumfoil wrote: post #24
mb720 wrote: post #15

I get that the author is frustrated with false claims about Qt, but calling people working on open source software "hippie coders" is just an insulting misrepresentation harming any rational debate.

I think ive read enough LKML to realize name calling doesn't slow software development and free software devs can handle being told off once in a while.

When I provide code for free I want to be treated with respect. There's evidence that this is not always the case when working on the Linux Kernel.

Of course, when somebody introduces bugs, that's a problem and should be talked about. But you can do that respectfully without sugarcoating the affair.

Re: For software that is cross platform and accessible, forget about Qt

#37

Post by Sean1708 »

rbehrends wrote: post #31
bjpbakker wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah sorry about that. Maybe "some" seems a bit too careless. Not intended that way. Substituting it for "the most popular proprietary screen-reader software" still doesn't change anything on my opinion though :)

It is not a realistic option for an author of accessible software to ignore JAWS. Obviously, open source software has no obligation to support accessibility, but that means that it'll be used less (this does not just affect visually impaired people, but also organizations and companies that have a need or obligation to keep their systems accessible; ADA compliance, for starters). So, yes, open source programmers are…

If the linked bug[0] is to be believed it sounds like JAWS are ignoring QT, rather than the other way around.

[0]: https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-53024

Re: For software that is cross platform and accessible, forget about Qt

#38

Post by MBCook »

bjpbakker wrote: post #16

This article isn't anything more than a rant. The author filed a bug in the QT issue tracker [1] that some proprietary screen reader (JAWS, that his customers use) does not work well with QT on Windows. No (technical) details provided whatsoever. I don't believe anyone in the QT team is /against/ stronger support for accessibility. IMO it is understandable that fixing some piece of proprietary software is not a top p…

I think his point is that you can't claim 'user freedom' and 'software for the people' if you ignore a chunk of the populace.

> Free software is not about a specific feature, it's about protecting user's freedom.

"Free software protects people's freedom (except the disabled, they're stuck with proprietary stuff, too bad)." That's not exactly a rousing motto. If anything the disabled are who should be helped most given how rediculously expensive accessibility software tends to be. It seems hypocritical compared to the usual messaging coming from the free software movement.

> He shouldn't blame a community of volunteers for not fixing his personal problems for free.

If free software wants to replace proprietary software this attitude doesn't work well. These aren't his personal complaints, they're problems for anyone with serious vision problems.

Re: For software that is cross platform and accessible, forget about Qt

#39

Post by MBCook »

mb720 wrote: post #36
tinalumfoil wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think ive read enough LKML to realize name calling doesn't slow software development and free software devs can handle being told off once in a while.

When I provide code for free I want to be treated with respect. There's evidence that this is not always the case when working on the Linux Kernel. Of course, when somebody introduces bugs, that's a problem and should be talked about. But you can do that respectfully without sugarcoating the affair.

This author wants to be treated with respect. They want to be to able to use free software too. But the projects are basically telling them 'too bad'. And when projects break stuff that's critical to his/her use the response is... oh well. If anyone ever fixes it we'll take the patch.

That's not how you treat people, especially if you want them in your community. This isn't someone complaining that the 'close' button window control was moved to the wrong side. They've lost their ability to use a large chunk of free software and no one (more or less) cares.

And they're probably frustrated as hell.

Re: For software that is cross platform and accessible, forget about Qt

#40

Post by MBCook »

kronos29296 wrote: post #29

Somehow the author assumes that the native gui has better accessibility features. In a world of bloated frameworks and browser as a gui type apps not every app is accessible. Most of the time it isn't even on their radar because of the tiny user base. One of those things that is just plain wrong when you spectate but when it is your job to do you find it a pain to implement.

Microsoft and Apple put a lot of time/effort into making sure their libraries provide the necessary support so people can write accessible software.

Individual programs may be bad, but the toolkits support it.

Here, none of the cross platform toolkits seem to even have the most basic support.

Post reply on HN