[GTALUG] Vaccination Receipts on Linux

[Karen Lewellen]

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