[laptop-accessibility] Advocacy for Elevated Disability Inclusion: Next Steps?

Sun Nov 30 12:20:08 EST 2008

 Sorry. I should have clarified that I installed AccessX on my XO, using the instructions on the OLPC Wiki page, when I was still running the previous build of Sugar. But when I upgraded, all the things I installed manually on the XO got wiped out. This thread reminds me that I'll have to reinstall AccessX. 

----
Visit Gabey's Place today. :-)

My blog for the final year of the Spectrum: The Final Countdown

-----Original Message-----
From: David K Parker <davparker at gmail.com>
To: Discussion of accessibility on the OLPC <accessibility at lists.laptop.org>
Sent: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 1:46 am
Subject: Re: [laptop-accessibility] Advocacy for Elevated Disability Inclusion: Next Steps?

So now I'm really getting mixed messages. Does the XO come with AccessX preloaded or not? If it does, does it get lost after upgrading the OS?

On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 2:23 PM,  <gabey8 at aol.com> wrote:

 TheOLPC Wiki has a page on AccessX. http://wiki.laptop.org/go/AccessX 

I had AccessX installed on my XO, prior to upgrading to the current build ot Sugar. This discussion thread has reminded me that I need to reinstall it.

Donna M.

----

Visit Gabey's Place today. :-)

My blog for the final year of the Spectrum: The Final Countdown

-----Original Message-----

From: David K Parker <davparker at gmail.com>

To: jg at laptop.org; Discussion of accessibility on the OLPC <accessibility at lists.laptop.org>

Sent: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 9:11 pm

Subject: Re: [laptop-accessibility] Advocacy for Elevated Disability Inclusion: Next Steps?

Well its refreshing to hear that their are such good people working to build accessibility features into the XO laptop. All I can say is thank god for open source software and open source programmers. I still find it hard to accept that designing accessibility features into the laptop from the outset met with opposition from the leadership. Especially basic, simple, tried and true software like AccessX. The motto truly should be "One Laptop per Child" and not?"One Laptop per Child except those with disabilities". I may donate this year because of efforts by the good people here.?

I'm still a little upset, as I've been in computing all my adult life, in spite of having lost my hands as a child. AccessX has been available since the DOS days. Every version of Linux and Windows I've ever use had this feature available. It sure has made it easier for me to get ahead. I'm now a network administrator. I was pretty incensed when I learned that this project excluded any software that would allow kids to overcome simple keyboarding issues.

I still say some wording about accessibility needs to be added to this projects mission statement.

Thanks,

David

On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 4:12 PM, Jim Gettys <jg at laptop.org> wrote:

Boy, today isn't my day to remember everything at once.

The other sugar issue some of the new widgets (in addition to the

standard GTK+ ones that already have full at-spi supprt) may still be

lacking at-spi support.

Check with Marco or Tomeo on the Sugar list to see.

Help gratefully accepted, if you are a programmer.

 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?- Jim

On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 13:12 -0600, David K Parker wrote:

> I thought that this was the forum for voicing our concerns to the

> OLPC. Are they purposely insulating themselves from opinions on how to

> improve their product? I was set to buy a couple of these laptops to

> donate at Christmas, but can no longer bring myself to support an

> organization that is so negligent towards supporting children with

> disabilities. It's almost as if they went through pains to purposely

> exclude simple features that would make their devices more accessible,

> such as sticky keys and mouse keys. At the very least, they are

> negligent for giving so little consideration to kids with

> disabilities.

>

>

> David

>

> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 7:07 AM, Andrea Shettle <ashettle at patriot.net>

> wrote:

> ? ? ? ? Given the recent discussions on this list criticizing OLPC for

> ? ? ? ? not

> ? ? ? ? putting higher priority on the needs of children with

> ? ? ? ? disabilities FROM

> ? ? ? ? THE BEGINNING, I'd like to make a few comments and ask some

> ? ? ? ? questions,

> ? ? ? ? either for the list at wide or for any individual who is in

> ? ? ? ? the

> ? ? ? ? strongest position to answer:

>

> ? ? ? ? 1. If OLPC's excuse for not putting disability access at

> ? ? ? ? higher

> ? ? ? ? priority from an earlier stage is, "the customers haven't

> ? ? ? ? asked for it

> ? ? ? ? yet" then I think that is a weak excuse. ?Any time one

> ? ? ? ? discusses

> ? ? ? ? disability inclusion, one must be sensitive to the fact that

> ? ? ? ? people

> ? ? ? ? with disabilities are already so profoundly marginalized and

> ? ? ? ? excluded

> ? ? ? ? that they very rarely have chances to really make themselves

> ? ? ? ? heard in

> ? ? ? ? society EVEN IN societies like the US where we have laws that

> ? ? ? ? help

> ? ? ? ? empower us (like the Americans with Disabilities Act ... or

> ? ? ? ? the

> ? ? ? ? equivalent Disability Discrimination Act for people in the UK

> ? ? ? ? etc).

> ? ? ? ? The NEED can be there and can be very extreme and still simply

> ? ? ? ? not be

> ? ? ? ? heard at the highest levels because the people with decision

> ? ? ? ? making

> ? ? ? ? power don't even SEE or HEAR people with disabilities, must

> ? ? ? ? less seek

> ? ? ? ? out their input. ?And the people with disabilities are denied

> ? ? ? ? the

> ? ? ? ? opportunities they need to MAKE high-level personnel listen to

> ? ? ? ? them.

>

> ? ? ? ? If we wait for the country governments buying the computers to

> ? ? ? ? *ask*

> ? ? ? ? for disability access before this becomes a priority, then

> ? ? ? ? this is

> ? ? ? ? putting disabled children in the very unfair position of

> ? ? ? ? waiting for a

> ? ? ? ? very long time before their needs are put on an equal footing

> ? ? ? ? with

> ? ? ? ? everyone else. ?I think OLPC should be taking more

> ? ? ? ? responsibility for

> ? ? ? ? considering the needs not only of those who can speak for

> ? ? ? ? themselves in

> ? ? ? ? an articulate and coordinated fashion (and thus be heard by

> ? ? ? ? the

> ? ? ? ? high-level decision makers in developing countries who

> ? ? ? ? actually pay for

> ? ? ? ? the XOs) but also the needs of those who are too isolated from

> ? ? ? ? each

> ? ? ? ? other to be able to put forth a unified, strong voice at this

> ? ? ? ? time.

>

>

> ? ? ? ? 2. Those of us who are making complaints like this one are

> ? ? ? ? currently

> ? ? ? ? preaching to the choir: we wouldn't be on this list if we

> ? ? ? ? didn't

> ? ? ? ? already support the idea of accessibility features for ALL

> ? ? ? ? children

> ? ? ? ? using the XO laptops. ?What we really need is for people with

> ? ? ? ? key

> ? ? ? ? decision making power within OLPC (I don't necessarily mean

> ? ? ? ? Negroponte

> ? ? ? ? himself, but people who at least are in a position to shape

> ? ? ? ? and

> ? ? ? ? implement the stated vision and mission of OLPC).

>

> ? ? ? ? Is there anyone meeting this description already in this

> ? ? ? ? list? ?If not,

> ? ? ? ? then all this complaining among ourselves about the low

> ? ? ? ? priority OLPC

> ? ? ? ? has put on disability access will accomplish little. ?Indeed,

> ? ? ? ? the work

> ? ? ? ? that some members are trying to do to figure out how to make

> ? ? ? ? the XO

> ? ? ? ? more accessible, design new software, etc., will itself

> ? ? ? ? accomplish

> ? ? ? ? little if the OLPC as a whole does not put high enough

> ? ? ? ? priority on

> ? ? ? ? actually USING the innovations created by our more skilled,

> ? ? ? ? hard

> ? ? ? ? working participants (not me, alas, because I barely even

> ? ? ? ? *understand*

> ? ? ? ? some of the more technical discussions on this list!).

>

>

> ? ? ? ? All the above leads to this point:

>

> ? ? ? ? 3. Perhaps rather than simply complaining among ourselves, or

> ? ? ? ? working

> ? ? ? ? in isolation from the overarching OLPC project on

> ? ? ? ? accessibility

> ? ? ? ? concerns, we should discuss how we can work together to

> ? ? ? ? ADVOCATE within

> ? ? ? ? OLPC to put higher priority on accessibility concerns.

>

> ? ? ? ? If there is anyone on this list who has been in some way in

> ? ? ? ? close

> ? ? ? ? contact with decision-making personnel within OLPC, or who

> ? ? ? ? simply have

> ? ? ? ? more knowledge how things work from the inside, then your

> ? ? ? ? input would

> ? ? ? ? be greatly welcomed.

>

> ? ? ? ? If we on this list who share an interest in influencing OLPC's

> ? ? ? ? disability inclusion policy can pull together and work out a

> ? ? ? ? strategy,

> ? ? ? ? then I would be happy to post a Call To Action at my blog

> ? ? ? ? (http://wecando.wordpress.com) for whatever small help that

> ? ? ? ? would

> ? ? ? ? provide in bringing attention to the cause. ?(My blog is

> ? ? ? ? targeted at

> ? ? ? ? people with disabilities in developing countries and their

> ? ? ? ? allies

> ? ? ? ? around the world, including international development

> ? ? ? ? professionals.)

>

> ? ? ? ? If there is enough interest in coordinating some kind of

> ? ? ? ? advocacy

> ? ? ? ? campaign targeted at OLPC, then we could consider creating a

> ? ? ? ? spin-off

> ? ? ? ? mailing list devoted to that purpose, in order to allow this

> ? ? ? ? list to

> ? ? ? ? retain its focus on the more technical aspects of

> ? ? ? ? accessibility.

>

> ? ? ? ? Andrea Shettle, MSW

> ? ? ? ? ashettle at patriot.net

> ? ? ? ? wecando.wordpress.com

>

> ? ? ? ? _______________________________________________

> ? ? ? ? accessibility mailing list

> ? ? ? ? accessibility at lists.laptop.org

> ? ? ? ? http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/accessibility

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> accessibility mailing list

> accessibility at lists.laptop.org

> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/accessibility

--

Jim Gettys <jg at laptop.org>

One Laptop Per Child

_______________________________________________

accessibility mailing list

accessibility at lists.laptop.org

http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/accessibility

_______________________________________________

accessibility mailing list

accessibility at lists.laptop.org

http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/accessibility

_______________________________________________

accessibility mailing list

accessibility at lists.laptop.org

http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/accessibility

_______________________________________________
accessibility mailing list
accessibility at lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/accessibility

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/accessibility/attachments/20081130/6741a78f/attachment-0001.htm 