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

41–50 of 86 posts

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

#41

Post by ktta »

distances wrote: post #32
ktta wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I wasn't thinking about the cookies part.

I just learnt about Referer. How doesn't this compromise privacy? Looks like I'm woefully uninformed about web security/privacy.

Also, found this[1] for anyone who just learnt about this like me.

For firefox, go to about:config and set Network.http.sendRefererHeader to 0

[1]:https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/referer-control/hn...

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

#42

Post by falcolas »

MBCook wrote: post #38
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 give…

> That's not exactly a rousing motto.

Especially since age causes everyone to be disabled somehow, and you're one accident away from being disabled in the prime of your life.

Consider it a form of insurance, if you must. You put forth a bit of effort into accessibility (in its many forms) now so you can keep using things later.

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

#43

Post by falcolas »

So, I'll toss this question out there: Is Electron or React Native better in this regard? Making the assumption that JAWS is capable of reading into HTML in Chrome as a browser, I would expect that it's capable of the same in Electron.

It sounds like, from this article, Java is a workable (if not well suited for a C++ driven backend). Of course, cross-platform shims aren't that hard, just time consuming.

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

#44

Post by falcolas »

Sean1708 wrote: post #37
rbehrends wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

A distinction without a difference, if you're trying to write accessible software. QT promised something it couldn't deliver.

Marketing at its finest. /s

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

#45

Post by falcolas »

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…

QT promised something it couldn't (wouldn't?) deliver upon. Given that the author explicitly wrote them with questions about it and was effectively lied to, his ire is both understandable and justified IMO.

What more should we expect of him?

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

#46

Post by falcolas »

whyever wrote: post #27
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 don't understand how people can be so entitled about free software. Especially given the reply by the Qt developers: > The JAWS people didn't answer emails when we reached out to them (admittedly quite a while ago), so we've been focusing on NVDA support. Patches to improve the situation with JAWS are welcome. Note that we may eventually implement UIA as opposed to IAccessible2, but that work is currently going slo…

By not marketing their software as accessible; by not telling the author in an explicit email that they would solve any accessibility issues he found?

If they had been clear up front about their accessibility support, I doubt this would have been an issue in the first place.

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

#47

Post by dvdgsng »

falcolas wrote: post #45
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…

QT promised something it couldn't (wouldn't?) deliver upon. Given that the author explicitly wrote them with questions about it and was effectively lied to, his ire is both understandable and justified IMO. What more should we expect of him?

Did they promise JAWS support?

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

#48

Post by kazinator »

> "And no other Free Software toolkit for that matter, because they basically all dont give a shit about accessibility on non-Linux platforms."

Whereas a big majority of proprietary software vendors don't care about users on non-mainstream platforms, whether or not those users have 20/20 vision or are completely blind.

> "If Free Software ever takes over, the blind will be unable to use their computers."

Does not follow from the observation that free software applications and libraries don't quite meet all of their functionality on Windows and haven't made it a priority to support accessibility. (For one thing, as long as we're using Windows, free software hasn't taken over.)

> "While other screen readers seemed to work (NVDA) it is simply not feasable to ask my future users to switch to a different screen reader just for a single program."

A screen reader should handle anything, even a program that implements its own font and pixel-pushes it to a canvas (there is OCR for that).

Anyway, what is this NVDA which can read from text fields in GUI widgets that the 'leading brand' reader doesn't handle?

NVDA is open source software, which means the code is accessible to anyone. This enables translators and developers around the world to continually contribute to its expansion and improvement.

https://www.nvaccess.org/about/our-story/

Thus the argument appears to be: "free software libraries don't support accessibility on Windows, other than through the use of a screen reader that is free software, translated into 43 languages, used by people in 120 countries, and a winner of multiple awards. Free software are just hipsters who don't give a damn are in it for self promotion and to just address their own requirements (and none of them are visually impaired)."

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

#49

Post by SyneRyder »

Sean1708 wrote: post #37
rbehrends wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I'm not sure about that - it also mentions that Qt is incompatible with Microsoft Narrator. If it doesn't work with the screen reader that comes bundled with the operating system, it suggests Qt is doing something wrong.

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

#50

Post by whyever »

falcolas wrote: post #46
whyever wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how people can be so entitled about free software. Especially given the reply by the Qt developers: > The JAWS people didn't answer emails when we reached out to them (admittedly quite a while ago), so we've been focusing on NVDA support. Patches to improve the situation with JAWS are welcome. Note that we may eventually implement UIA as opposed to IAccessible2, but that work is currently going slo…

By not marketing their software as accessible; by not telling the author in an explicit email that they would solve any accessibility issues he found? If they had been clear up front about their accessibility support, I doubt this would have been an issue in the first place.

It is accessible, just not with some specific software. From what I can see, they tried to solve it, but could not due to lack of cooperation by the software's creator. Maybe they should have spent more effort, but then this was not a paying customer apparently.
Post reply on HN