Hi Evan, Finally a moment for the rest of this thread, or part of it at least. On Mon, 20 Sep 2021, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
FWIW, I have been using the CANimmunize app <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ca.ohri.immunizeapp> long before COVID; I have long needed a vaccination passport -- a WHO "yellow card" which has existed since the 30's <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Certificate_of_Vaccination_or_Prophylaxis> -- cause I've been to places that won't let you in without a Yellow Fever shot (as well as protection against a bunch of lesser but still nasty bugs). Its interface is clunky but it works, and I'll be using it to store my COVID jab receipts. That is quite handy for you I would imagine.
As someone who finally gave up and loaded Windows on his laptop after two decades of fighting with Linux sound systems, battling desktops and inferior drivers, I'm quite convinced that lack of profile is not the cause. We've had twenty years of "this is the year of the Linux desktop" and it now rings extremely hollow, even if you count Chromebooks. Despite many many years of trying Linux has never risen out of a low-single-digit percentage of the installed base, and the very-real reasons for this stagnation are many.
I will have to see if I still have the article, but I found one recently listing all of the places where indeed Linux is in use, perhaps under the hood, but in use all the same. still, it would likely surprise you just how many access related projects exist. Windows for many continues to carry quite the access price tag, the third party things needed to achieve inclusion when working with windows, depending on the individual, can get close to $10k, and one still has to deal with problems. For the developers working in Linux, there is an entire blindness group for Python for example, the thought was to cut down the cost, while building in inclusion from the code up...or in theory at least.
the server side the story is totally flipped, but on the desktop Linux is for enthusiasts, software developers, other power users and not much beyond.
Again, I respect your experience. still, again, you might be quite surprised how much energy is spent by individuals who, seeking inclusive access, and having the background, spend time and energy building Linux distributions for populations who have been largely ignored by Microsoft, and who are being stereotyped wrongly by google. To be sure, as your comment below simply illustrates, a great deal of the problem is limited public relations.
Personally I think in this case web accessibility issues are in the hands of the browser maker rather than the OS, anyway.
Evan, Forgive me if My assumption here is incorrect. Yet your sentence above suggests you may not fully understand just what is meant by access, or what adaptive technology actually provides. Given some of the other comments, this may get spread out, but let me start a bit here. For many, close to a billion according to some sources, adaptive technology can be a substitution for, or an extension of bodily function. Hands, ears, eyes, brains, combinations of all of these even. What that means from the OS standpoint is that, when incorporated well, one can engage with your computer in an inclusive way, close to, if not soon after you turn on the machine. what some sought to do with Linux in fact is provide system information, from the start, something never achieved in Windows. To help illustrate, your desktop has keyboard, mouse, monitor, and cp unit. My personal adaptive combination, while not entirely providing system boot stuff, does, uniformly interface with my keyboard, providing as much or as little monitor information I desire, and lets me take care of my CPU as well...all of that is needful before one even reaches a browser. Still, your browser idea might be true if every single site on the entire web incorporated inclusive design...which of course does not happen. Add that browsers get broken too. As a simple example Firefox stopped working with Apple's built-into-the-os screen reader voiceover about a decade ago. Meaning that for ten years one could not use the browser with some of apple's fundamental adaptive tools..it took until 2020 before that started to be fixed. and before you suggest that one can just use something else, that is not always the case, again because of design. It can be managed, quite easily actually, but that means choice on the part of decision makers. I am drawing largely below from respected UK web consultant Craig Buckler from his 2017 article on sitepoint.com https://www.sitepoint.com/author/craig-buckler/ although I am sure he is not the only one to outline the most inclusive practice for website design. That practice is known as Progressive Enhancement. quoting Craig. "You create the simplest HTML-only experience then enhance it with images, fonts, CSS and JavaScript when those files successfully download and execute. Users can receive a different experience. Those using the latest Chrome on a desktop may get the highest level of functionality. Those running Opera Mini on a two year-old mobile may receive a basic styled page. Importantly, everyone receives something and the site/app remains usable for everyone." and important to many experiencing a disability, accommodating that experience in the fashion best suited for their needs, a site or application still works for them. The buzz words are best suited for their needs, not best dictated by someone who has no daily experience, for that individual, of what accommodation means. Anyway, that is a start, Karen