High contrast and High contrast inverse themes are poor quality for the Unity desktop

Bug #964685 reported by crippled user
50
This bug affects 8 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
gnome-themes-standard (Ubuntu)
Medium
Unassigned
Precise
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

Live CD under 12.04 daily build 25 Mar 2012 - issuing ongoing under all Betas. Same under installed 2D and 3D desktops.

Accessibility features that have either been removed and which have to be restored before 12.04 official release - and/or system wide issues that deny access causing disability discrimination.

1. Start live cd - click desktop to change background to suitable colour. Facility to maximise window using Alt F8 has is greyed out - needs to re restored to meet accessibility standards - and should be working in the beta. This accessibility feature is present in 10.04.4 through to 11.10 (verified today) - and should still be present in 12.04. It should not have been removed or deprecated under Gnome shell/3 or Unity - or for testing purposes.

2. Change screen theme to high contrast removes power button from top bar - and top bar and window decoration does not change to high contrast. Only the chosen desktop colour shows. Indicators for email etc are also not high contrast. The Install Ubuntu icon fails to change to a High Contrast form. Other desktop icons do change to high contrast - except the Install Ubuntu icon which seems to be immutable. NOt very nice for someone who wants to install Ubuntu but can't see the icon.

3. Change theme to high contrast inverted and same as 2 above - but also removes sound control as well as power control. The Icons then default to some type of system wide scheme which is NOT High contrast. Basic denial of accessibility.

4. It is not acceptable for people needing High Contrast to have to switch to a None High Contrast Theme to have access to Sound Control and especially The Power control including user switching.

5. NO access to change of pointer/cursor to provide High Contrast for pointers - not much use for the high contrast themes if the mouse pointer and cursors can't be seen! P^( This was previously available by right click desktop and change appearance! Why is it not there now and where is it. A wide hunt across the System settings provided no options - even using the most rational place to look under "Mouse". It seems that there is to be no reasonable or rational way to have high contrast accessibility which prevents they OS being test driven or even installed.

6. When changing to high contrast the icons in the Unity launcher Icons are "NOT" made high contrast - or at the very least have back lighting Turned OFF to increase contrast. This is basic accessibility that should be functional now. Orange Icon on an orange background is not high contrast - and at the very least mouse over with high contrast selected should turn off the back-lighting of the icon the mouse hovers over to provide increased contrast and accessibility. Hack to turn off back-lighting already available and should already be part of HIgh Contrast themes to provide - well..... High Contrast.

7. The High Contrast Accessibility Themes fail to have suitable window borders to differentiate edge of window from any other screen element below. The windows need to draw a relevant and suitable border to define edges. Over lapping windows have no suitable and discernible edge which prevents manual resize by dragging window edge.

8. High Contrast Invert has no suitable Icons associated with it and produces only system wide icons that are anything but High Contrast making desktop icons inaccessible.

9. When attempting to use Ubuntu-bug to report live, it does not work. Advise providing service within ubuntu-bug to allow basic accessibility issues to be reported without user having to have full knowledge of which package it is related to. What is causing the changes to standard accessibility that has been available since 10.04 and before? Is it Unity? Gnome Shell? Is it the Theme packages? ... and why is the end user expected to know which package to report against when it is not their responsibility to personally maintain Disability Accessibility on the desktop system wide no matter what packages are involved.

10. A user should be able to type "ubuntu-bug accessibility" or "ubuntu-bug disability" in a terminal and from there be able to report what is a system wide issue and which is not an issue for a specific package. This would meet disability accessibility requirements as an auxiliary aide or service and reasonable adjustment. This should have been a basic set up by now - in alpha to allow full participation of disabled users as part of the pre launch testing. Better still there should be a singular app with window to commence bug reporting - and that also should be fully accessible from the top bar - and with a dedicated accessibility issue route to make report.

11. May consider reporting any other issues (accessibility related or otherwise) when some basic accessibility issues have been addressed and allow a rational opportunity to do so free from disability discrimination.

12. Ubuntu 12.04 - Unity presently fails all basic accessibility protocols and standards for multiple disabilities. The failures are both direct and indirect discrimination which has been antisocial and unacceptable for many years and illegal in many countries.

Foot note - this report filed upon behalf of other user ( I.T. Grad ) who attempted to do this from the live 12.04 CD front end but was unable to complete the process after "3 Hours" due to the inherent accessibility failures which were insurmountable.

They were able to make all the necessary accessibility adjustments under previous live CD front ends (10.04.4 to 11.10) in less than 2 minutes - to verify that past accessibility for Live CD had been present and functional - and to verify how it worked. That was also done within the 3 hour window using both Like CD in Vbox and also using multiple installed desktop system.

After 3 hours they saw no point in making report as their time and good will had already been wasted.

The suggestion as to "ubuntu-bug accessibility" or "ubuntu-bug disability" is theirs - given that they managed to open a terminal and type those phrases only to be told there was no associated package. As the accessibility failure prevents then from getting that info, it is rational and reasonable that the accessibility issue needs to be reported and resolved first - and then they may be able to undertake the other steps to find out some package details and reports them. The present reporting system with Ubuntu-bug causes basic discrimination and obstructs reporting most serious matters that should not require any package details being reported.

Having studied all relevant links to Bug Tracking - the instructions provided do not address or deal with the issues - or provide relevant guidance/advice/information on how to report such basic system wide issues - hence points 9 and 10 above.

The matters are reported here for immediate action and resolution.

Revision history for this message
crippled user (saddharmap) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Ubuntu Foundations Team Bug Bot (crichton) wrote :

Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. It seems that your bug report is not filed about a specific source package though, rather it is just filed against Ubuntu in general. It is important that bug reports be filed about source packages so that people interested in the package can find the bugs about it. You can find some hints about determining what package your bug might be about at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/FindRightPackage. You might also ask for help in the #ubuntu-bugs irc channel on Freenode.

To change the source package that this bug is filed about visit https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/964685/+editstatus and add the package name in the text box next to the word Package.

[This is an automated message. I apologize if it reached you inappropriately; please just reply to this message indicating so.]

tags: added: bot-comment
Revision history for this message
Alan Bell (alanbell) wrote : Re: Failed disability accessability standards - 12.04 - Live CD & Installed

this bug appears to be several issues, plus a general point about the rather woeful state of the accessibility of the beta at the moment. I will try to re-file some of the points about the high contrast as separate addressable bugs against the right packages. Unity 5.8 was released today so some features might have changed, I doubt much on the high contrast themes have been touched though, I think the main update should be making the HUD and global menus less broken with Orca and perhaps making lightdm accessible. It would be great to have more people interested in fixing these things, and being involved in the accessibility team. There certainly have been a heap of changes to the themes and the features that the themes should provide and yes, the non-default themes will get no love from Canonical so it is up to people like us who want them to work to make them work.

affects: ubuntu → gnome-themes-standard (Ubuntu)
Revision history for this message
Alan Bell (alanbell) wrote :

in fact reading again it is all a general failure of the high contrast themes which have not been maintained in Ubuntu, just Ambiance and Radiance.

tags: added: a11y
Revision history for this message
crippled user (saddharmap) wrote :

Alan - it is not just about themes!

The "Theme" is that Disability Access is a "Fail"!

Disability, and the use of Auxiliary Aids/Services, is not all about Orca and other adaptive technologies. Many people derive no benefit from such technology and don't need it. Some far more basic accessibility issues are being missed and ignored.

I have test driven 12.04 with a number of people who do not need Orca or other specific programs. All they need is the ability to have colour schemes work - high contrast to aide focus due to Neurodiversity - and the ability to make a window fill all available desktop space to aide focus and concentration - and at the same time have access to basic controls such as the Power Button and volume control.

I see that under Unity that the recommended primary route to being able to access modification of the desktop is via the power button to get access to System wide control and "System Settings" - and the very place you need to go is removed if you right click on the desktop and select "High Contrast".?

The lack of accessible routes to report Accessibility Issues and fails from the Beta desktop is also unacceptable - given that all necessary basic functionality has and was present in 10.04 and beyond until now!

The present situation of regressive and not progressive.

From the Canonical website - "Accessibility is cutting edge in software design ".

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Accessibility

If this is cutting edge - then someone has missed the bleeding obvious as they cut corners to get an edge. 8^(

Also from the Canonical website:

"Accessible

Accessibility is central to the Ubuntu philosophy. We believe that computing is for everyone regardless of nationality, race, gender or disability. Fully translated into 25 languages, Ubuntu also includes essential assistive technologies, which are, of course, completely free."

http://www.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/features

That claim is now demonstrably false. It had some accuracy under 10.04 to 11.10 - but now?

When taking simple, basic steps - using well known and basic industry standard steps to improve accessibility, to even test drive a live CD, cause the whole distro to become inaccessible .... ?

That is not just an issue with a high contrast theme - it's far more fundamental and the issue far bigger!

It is not even a single bug - it is far more fundamental.

Revision history for this message
Charlie Kravetz (charlie-tca) wrote :

Please file separate bugs for separate issues. Bugs will be worked by different developers for each package. By combining many individual issues into a single bug, it is not possible to define which package that developer should work on. If this is not a single bug, then it is not valid in Launchpad bug tracking, and needs to broken down to the individual bugs.

---
Ubuntu Bug Squad volunteer triager
http://wiki.ubuntu.com/BugSquad

Revision history for this message
Alan Bell (alanbell) wrote :

> It is not even a single bug - it is far more fundamental.

yes, and this is a bug tracker, for tracking and fixing single bugs. This one is all related to the high contrast themes which reside in the gnome-themes-standard package - and might be fixed there, or we might think about doing a new ambiance-high contrast or reverse theme. I will raise that at the Ubuntu Developer Summit for 12.10 and see if there are any takers to do that work.

I do know about the general problem, and we are raising that in the right places. Maybe you could post some stuff about the wider issue to the unity-design mailing list.

Revision history for this message
crippled user (saddharmap) wrote :

Alan ! 12.10?

The issue is now and it is in the UK a breach of Equality Law!

It "May"(?) be dealt with in the "Ubuntu Developer Summit for 12.10"?

That is beyond "UN"acceptable!

I have just had the Joy of attempting to even speak to the correct employee of Canonical in London ( Jane Silber or Steven Bianchi) - and being told it is not a Matter for anyone - so tell the community - and generally being messed about and treated like an idiot by the "Human Resources Dept"!

As to wider issues - maybe someone needs to Read The Equality Act 2010 - sections 19 and 20! (26 may also be useful given the treatment I have just put up with).

The operation and functioning of "The Equality Act 2010" - there is no log file for it - and it does not come installed in Ubuntu - and there is no repo for it! Not sure that it has any place in Launchpad either, since The Code it comes from does not seem to be compiled into Ubuntu 12.04. .... which is evidently beyond a Bug and needs some other form of professional oversight and tracking!

It can be found http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents

I will copy my original post above over to the "unity-design mailing list" - so that they aware fully aware - but it will not be allowed to simply vanish and be ignored.

I am getting the impression that having the issues vanish is what some people want!

Revision history for this message
Alan Bell (alanbell) wrote :

no, people don't want issues to vanish, they want them to be fixed, this takes work. If nobody is willing to do the work then the problems don't get fixed. If you want to dive in and fix the themes, maybe building a new theme based on the stuff you will find in /usr/share/themes/Ambiance then that would be great, contributions are welcome. I will think about doing something with the themes in the 12.10 development cycle, but I am not doing anything on it pre-UDS, but you are welcome to do so, and if you have a patch that is good before 12.04 I will help you with the feature freeze exception and UI freeze exception to get it in.

Revision history for this message
Launchpad Janitor (janitor) wrote :

Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.

Changed in gnome-themes-standard (Ubuntu):
status: New → Confirmed
Alan Bell (alanbell)
summary: - Failed disability accessability standards - 12.04 - Live CD & Installed
+ High contrast and High contrast inverse themes are poor quality for the
+ Unity desktop
Revision history for this message
Charlie Kravetz (charlie-tca) wrote :

Thank you for reporting this issue. I am marking it triaged based on comments by Allen Bell that the theme will be looked into.

Changed in gnome-themes-standard (Ubuntu):
importance: Undecided → Medium
status: Confirmed → Triaged
Revision history for this message
crippled user (saddharmap) wrote :
Download full text (11.6 KiB)

There still seems to be a set of missed issues.

Why have basics accessibility features present in 10.04 - 10.10 - 11.04 - 11.11 been either removed or rendered inaccessible in 12.04?

If they were there before, why have they not there now?

Marking the issues as Triaged does not make them go away - and it is nice to see that someone actually noted that the issues affects more than one person.

If Alan is to look at Themes for 12.10 - is he also to be assumed to be looking at all issues?

I see that the Wide Issue of accessibility is getting submerged in "Fudge" and people attempting to break it down into coded chunks!.... one step at a time!

Not seeing Wood for the Trees/Forest comes to mind.

It seems that the issue is so big that attempting to break it into smaller coded chunks will not work - and it won't go away.

It may be something if it was possible to locate who is the one person who has the responsibility, and even the insight, for dealing with Accessibility on a platform wide basis.

It seems that it is not the Accessibility Team - as Alan has already pointed out.

Is there anyone with that responsibility?

It seems that At Canonical London the view of some is that the person is "Charlie Kravatz", as he is the person named as responsible for the web page https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Accessibility

Is it Charlie who has decided to remove basic accessibility features?

I think not - But if it is Charlie who has re-coded so much to remove them, can that coding please be addressed as a very Big Bug! P^)

I have been amused by some comments, that have made it to my in box, - and being told that I need to break down every single incidence of Failure and Blocked/Failed accessibility into a format that others can read and understand.

It seems that this was not clear enough " 1. Start live cd - click desktop to change background to suitable colour. Facility to maximise window using Alt F8 has is greyed out - needs to re restored to meet accessibility standards - and should be working in the beta.".

I have also been told that as Ubuntu is free it is, in the opinion of some, not covered by Discrimination Legislation - and they also have other views on what they call "Public Government" as being the only one's who have to avoid Discriminating - private companies, not for profits, trusts, charities, foundations are all supposedly exempt and can discriminate freely!

Some may be able to understand computer code, but Civil and legal code is not their forte! They don't grasp the variables.

I am also advised that I am "Not" highlighting bugs and the bug tracker is not the place to raise issues! There is the clear image coming though that some don't want to hear about the matters as they are bigger than the average bug.

However, they also can't tell me where is the place - or who the people are that need to be contacted - so it leaves the impression that some simply want the issue to vanish and not be raised. Make it all go away by ignoring it....

How familiar that pattern is! It is a systemic attitude around disability accessibility that has continued for centuries and is alive and well in this millennium.

No-one seems to know where "Sys...

Revision history for this message
crippled user (saddharmap) wrote :

Screen shot to show menu from 10.04 live cd allowing window resize through alt F8 - accessibility option removed on 12.04 system wide.

Revision history for this message
crippled user (saddharmap) wrote :

Screen shot to show menu from 12.04 live cd showing window resize through alt F8 greyed out in contrast to correct function in 10.04-11.10 - accessibility option removed on 12.04 system wide.

Revision history for this message
crippled user (saddharmap) wrote :

Image of interface under 10.04 to control cursor size and provide accessible options - High Contrast etc. - facilities removed under 12.04

No Equivalent facility, as reasonable adjustment, within 12.04.

It appears that 12.04 allows only one cursor with fixed size and colour.

There are no options to add suitable facility either through Universal Access in Control Panel - and there is no listed or suitable software in Software Centre.

Revision history for this message
Alan Bell (alanbell) wrote :

Charlie Kravatz and Alan Bell are both people like you who use Ubuntu. Neither of us work for Canonical, neither of us are paid to work on Ubuntu, we are just trying to make it better because we want to. You can do that too, or you can make bugs harder to process by not filing separate individual bugs for actionable issues.

Revision history for this message
Alan Bell (alanbell) wrote :

Some windows don't resize, which is why the resize option is greyed out. That isn't a bug, or an accessibility issue really. Windows are allowed to tell the window manager they don't want to be resized. Most windows do still allow resizing and I kind of prefer things to allow resizing, but it is fine for some applications to decide that they will just create a window the right size. You can file bugs against them if the content doesn't fit when you have specified large fonts, or if they request a size bigger than a netbook screen.

Revision history for this message
crippled user (saddharmap) wrote :

"Some windows don't resize, which is why the resize option is greyed out. "

It is recognised that manufacturers and designers may choose to present a window a particular way - for example the first window on the live cd which asks if you would like to test drive or install.

In 10.01 to 11.11 there has been a standard option of using F8 and edge dragging to maximise. This may be on no value to some users - but to people who need to maximise window and to assist with focus and workflow - addressing many people wit neurodiverse disabilities - it has been there as "Reasonable Adjustment".

That has now been removed - and so a basic step in accessibility has been removed.

"Most windows do still allow resizing and I kind of prefer things to allow resizing, but it is fine for some applications to decide that they will just create a window the right size."

It is not the windows choice as to it's size or if it can even be resized! It is a human who has made that decision.

Because it affects accessibility, I am repeatedly told that it is an issue/bug for the accessibility team - and yet then It appears to be SEP.

If it is not a matter that falls under the Purview - Responsibility - Remit of accessibility, then which team or app - program - snippet of code does it come under and then It can be linked to the right place.

Still no response that addresses the removal of Resizable Cursor!

Is that for Accessibility Team ( as I am told ) or is it yet another team - app - code writer that needs to be alerted, and how do you file a bug against code that does not work, because it apparently has been removed in full from 12.04?

Revision history for this message
Alan Bell (alanbell) wrote :

> Still no response that addresses the removal of Resizable Cursor!

please file that as a separate bug against the correct package if you want anyone to look at it.
You can file bugs against ayatana design if you like, you can participate remotely in UDS if you like, you can fix stuff you don't like if you like, just please try to use the bug tracker in a useful way by filing individually actionable bugs. No there is no one person who can magically make it all work right. You are preaching to the choir here, we know it isn't good enough, we are trying to make it better.

Revision history for this message
crippled user (saddharmap) wrote :

AS the heading for the Bug Report stated when submitted

"Failed disability accessibility standards - 12.04 - Live CD & Installed"

When did it get changed to read "High contrast and High contrast inverse themes are poor quality for the Unity desktop"?

Point 1 as made is not even about have anything to do with that heading!

Odd that - how the actual reported issue has been "Fudged" and changed and how suddenly it has to be made smaller.

"> Still no response that addresses the removal of Resizable Cursor!

please file that as a separate bug against the correct package if you want anyone to look at it."

AS I said "Is that for Accessibility Team ( as I am told ) or is it yet another team - app - code writer that needs to be alerted, and how do you file a bug against code that does not work, because it apparently has been removed in full from 12.04?".

I need either some basic information as to which Package the issue is in - the Resize Cursor not working because it is not there. As the code seems to have been removed I am advised that It's a Ubuntu wide issue - or a Unity issue.

There seems to be a basic logic problem. Which package does the Bug get filed against - and can you file a bug against an apparently non-existent package?

It's a bit like "Is there a noise if a tree falls over and no-one hears it?".

If basic accessibility is not there because the apparent needed packages have been removed - is that a bug?

I keep being told it is a bug - and then it apparently is not!

That is one of the reasons I have been looking for the contact details of the person or persons who have the responsibility to ensure that basic accessibility provisions are present and working... or conversely the person or persons who have had the necessary provisions removed.

It's working the problem from both ends and seeking solution - not brick walls and poor responses.

So if the issue is NOT the Responsibility of the "Accessibility Team" when I keep being told It is - then who is best contacted so that the issues - bugs - or what ever people wish to see them as can be addressed.

Revision history for this message
Alan Bell (alanbell) wrote :

I changed the title to an actionable subject. I don't know what package the cursor thing is in, I have not seen that before. File against Ubuntu if you are not sure. This isn't a productive use of anyones time. Please rant on a blog or mailing list (preferably <email address hidden> but there are others), and file separate, individually actionable bugs in Launchpad. Even better, contribute fixes.

Revision history for this message
crippled user (saddharmap) wrote :
Download full text (5.8 KiB)

Please note that the lack of certain Basic accessibility features does prevent people who need them for test driving 12.04 - and having equality of opportunity to note, report and have what are supposed bugs dealt with. This issue should not even be getting addressed at this stage - it should never have arisen.

"I don't know what package the cursor thing is in, I have not seen that before."

Any hints?

Is it an issue with Gnome-Control-Centre - which appears to be the app that has historically allowed ready and rational access to Accessibility Features through Right Click Desktop - Appearance Preferences - Theme - Customise?

From Synaptic:

"This package contains configuration applets for the GNOME desktop,
allowing to set ""accessibility configuration"", desktop fonts, keyboard
and ""mouse properties"", sound setup, ""desktop theme"" and background, user
interface properties, screen resolution, and other GNOME parameters."

Does that make it a Bug to file against "Gnome-Control-Centre"?

Is accessibility supposed to be dealt with there?

There have also been basic high contrast cursors from dmz-cursor-theme. These appear to be installed in 12.04 under /usr/share/icons/foo/cursors - yet there is no apparent way to utilze them - or change the size should they be selected.

Does that make it a bug to file against dmz-cursor-theme?

The cursors are there and appear to be correctly formatted - so is it correct to report them as a bug, or is that just wasting someone else's time?

Is it an issue with the "System Settings" Panel - which is also an obvious place for basic accessibility features to be accessed through The Universal Access settings?

Presently it appears that in 10.04-11.10 it's "Appearance preference tool" but I can't identify the same of equivalent in 12.04.

it seems that rational access by the equivalent route of right click on desktop - change desktop image - takes you to "System Settings" where there are no discernible accessible routes to change cursor or size.

Does that make it a bug to file against ""System Settings" Panel"?

How does one change to an installed high contrast cursor if the facility to change cursor is not present?

Is it all the options above and Accessibility Team too?

How does one enlarge the desired cursor if that facility is also not present?

Ditto as to where it should be filed!

It would be easier if the facility was present and not working - it may give a hint to the end user - but as it's not present at all and is a primary Accessibility Issue it seems to the the view that it's the Accessibility Team who should take the lead.

It also remains unclear how matters are to be viewed. Is the lack of basic accessibility features a bug or another issue in multiple applications - and where does the failure lie?

I'm advised that as it's system wide it needs to be filed against either Ubuntu - Unity - Accessibility Team or all three. But it then seems that it is to be seen solely as an Accessibility Issue - and for the Accessibility Team.

Is it a bug if the files or apps - controls - code needed to use a facility have been removed and deny accessibility?

Some seem to grasp the issue if th...

Read more...

Revision history for this message
Charlie Kravetz (charlie-tca) wrote :

As stated before, this is not a forum or blog. If you have specific issues, please file specific bugs for them. As a bug report, accessibility is not completely broken for any user. Many of us with disabilities are continuously using Ubuntu. We use a screen-reader, we use on screen keyborads, we use high-contrast themes, we use large cursors, we use large text. Those items may have some issues, but accessibility is not completely broken by any means.

Please stop using this as your personal blog now, and help us improve accessibility. If you have specific fixes for issues, include patches with your specific bug reports. If you feel a need to rant, write a blog.

---
Ubuntu Bug Squad volunteer triager
http://wiki.ubuntu.com/BugSquad

Revision history for this message
Alan Bell (alanbell) wrote :

The reason I am repeatedly directing you to <email address hidden> is because I want more people to read this stuff. As I said, if you want to work on making Ubuntu more accessible then that would be great, we would love you to help.

Revision history for this message
crippled user (saddharmap) wrote :

Charlie - I have now spoken with a specific Canoniocal employee - and after triaging matters - having to track multiple instances of issues across the OS at different stages of operation form live CD to installed system it appears that there are - as I suspected - more issues that were first grasped.

the list of affected packages to which bug reports have to be applied:

1) Compiz
2) gnome-control-centre
3) indicator-applet (Two Bugs)
4) gnome-accessibility-themes
5) gnome-accessibility-themes-extras
6) humanity-themes
7) apport

.. and that is just to deal with basic accessibility as highlighted in three simple and direct areas. It also has to address branding - Ubuntu identity and a few other issues that arise from the complexity of matters.

I have to make it clear that I do not welcome being dismissed as a disabled person for raising Disability Access issues and failures which are discriminatory.

It is not a blogging issue - or ranting! It's hard work!

It is interesting that in response to the points made on accessibility only Alan has picked up one package that needs attention out of an apparent 7 - and possibly more.

Others have highlighted nothing other than their own opinions. If bug tracking and fixing was based on that it would be much more of a waste of time.

I also have to say that I have been dismayed by the responses I have received from diverse routes. For the record - I have quite extensive experience in IT and interface design - also working with diverse disabled people to provide THEIR accessibility needs - and bug hunting cross systems, both I.T, and Huamn.

I don't use my needs or the needs of others to estimate or dismiss another person's needs. To me that could be called Ubuntu. if someone is happy with their accessibility Hoorah - but when even one person is being denied basic and needed accessibility because others have failed to protect it - for me that is one person too many!

I will ensure to the best of my ability that things are progressed - but I have to say given the treatment I have received by divers routes - and a number of sentiments that have been communicated to me - if they represent Ubuntu I will be migrating to another OS.

So if you and others can assist in any way in getting all the relevant bug reports filed and actioned - be my guest.

I have to say that it has been a learning experience - and one which has been far less than positive or welcomed.

Revision history for this message
crippled user (saddharmap) wrote :

Alan

As highlighted it appears that bug reports required are far more extensive than I had been able to trace prior to input from Canonical.

the list of affected packages to which bug reports have to be applied:

1) Compiz
2) gnome-control-centre
3) indicator-applet (Two Bugs)
4) gnome-accessibility-themes
5) gnome-accessibility-themes-extras
6) humanity-themes
7) apport

There may be more. I am still checking info against different information - as I don't want to be accused of filing the wrong bug reports.

I don't know the value of <email address hidden> - given that basic accessibility should have been designed in throughout - yet appears to have been designed out.

If it had been a factor in the basic design process it would be rock solid and fucntional in the Beta to allow people who need it to be included in the wider prooving and bug hunting. The failure at the design stage to respect that is not a matter that I take lightly. To me it is simply unacceptable and discriminatory.

Maybe they need to hear that - and as I have been discussing today - maybe Canonical require a Accessibility Champion/Guardian to protect the rights of Disabled people to have access - and also protect Ubuntu overall from the risks that come from getting it wrong.

I have to say - that in dialogue with individuals across multiple routes I am shocked at the laise faire attitudes I keep encountering - and the wrong headedness I keep encountering to so many matters and risks.

I am most unhappy with much that has been communicated and the way that it has occurred - and that is not just a reference to this thread. I am most seriously considering If I should be using Ubuntu at all - quite something after 5 years and the way I have pushed it to so many people.

Revision history for this message
Alan Bell (alanbell) wrote :

this isn't a thread, it is a bug report in the bug tracker. I got the domain wrong on the list, it should have been <email address hidden> you can see the archives here https://lists.launchpad.net/unity-design/
and join the team here https://launchpad.net/~unity-design
yes, we are aware of all those other packages you mentioned and we know how they slot together. You can find other bugs relating to accessibility here:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=a11y
there are lots. We know. We track them one at a time in the bug tracker, and discuss longer term policy issues on the mailing lists and at the Ubuntu Developer Summit. Yes we would all like there to be more people working on these issues.

Revision history for this message
Alan Bell (alanbell) wrote :

dammit, <email address hidden> they confuse me by being one of the only lists on on lists.ubuntu.com

Revision history for this message
Launchpad Janitor (janitor) wrote :

This bug was fixed in the package gnome-themes-standard - 3.6.2-0ubuntu1

---------------
gnome-themes-standard (3.6.2-0ubuntu1) raring; urgency=low

  * New upstream release (LP: #1067207)
    - Fixes hard to read selected desktop items (LP: #1054701)
    - Spinner is now animated (LP: #1051851)
  * debian/control.in:
    - Build-depend on GTK 2
  * debian/patches/revert-drop-a11y-themes, debian/rules,
    debian/source/include-binaries, debian/gnome-accessibility-themes.install
    - Drop poorly maintained LowContrast and HighContrastInverse themes
      so that we can focus on making HighContrast better
      (LP: #964685, #958411)
  * debian/gnome-accessibility-themes.install:
    - Install all the icons
 -- Jeremy Bicha <email address hidden> Thu, 22 Nov 2012 11:24:34 -0500

Changed in gnome-themes-standard (Ubuntu):
status: Triaged → Fix Released
Revision history for this message
Alexander List (alexlist) wrote :

This needs to be released for Precise as well.

Revision history for this message
Launchpad Janitor (janitor) wrote :

Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.

Changed in gnome-themes-standard (Ubuntu Precise):
status: New → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
Lupius (lupius) wrote :

As Alexander said - this is not fixed in Precise

Revision history for this message
Jeremy Bicha (jbicha) wrote :

This was fixed in Ubuntu 13.04 "Raring" by dropping the Low Contrast and High Contrast Inverse themes. Because Ubuntu 12.04 LTS "Precise" is a stable release we can't remove things that people may be using.

Changed in gnome-themes-standard (Ubuntu Precise):
status: Confirmed → Won't Fix
To post a comment you must log in.