Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last


Hi,

As I've been rather vocal on this issue in the last couple of days in
particular, I'd really like to be in a better position to lend a hand
with any proceedings.  Can anyone point me to some docs to look over
for bug reporting in LO?  And, does the user account creation
mechanism for the bug reporting site have one of those abominable
captcha thingies on it?  It's always been a barrier to me before since
I can never, for the life of me make out the audio challenges.  After
the third or fourth time I replay it, I  am ready to toss the old pc
out the window to the accompaniment of mad cackling and jumping up and
down in maniacle glee.

Alex M

On 8/31/12, Tom Davies <tomdavies04@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Hi :)
In bug-reports there are several drop-downs.  One has "feature request" and
i think another has "Easy hack"?  Would one of those be better than the
other?  Which of those was which option of the a, b, c etc?
Regards from
Tom :)







________________________________
From: Ti tengo d'occhio <info@titengodocchio.it>
To: LibreOffice@bielefeldundbuss.de
Cc: Roman Eisele <post@roman-eisele.de>; Marc Paré <marc@marcpare.com>;
libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org; accessibility@global.libreoffice.org

Sent: Friday, 31 August 2012, 10:35
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-accessibility] [Libreoffice-qa] Adding
"Accessibility" component to Bug Assistant

Hi Rainer,

well, I didn't know that there were developers focused on specific
components; in this case adding an "accessibility component" won't be the
best thing to do, in my opinion…

At this point I think we could go for solution C or solution A; in case
of solution A, would it be possible to view all issues with the
pseudo-keyword "accessibility"?

However I think that solution C could be very suitable; in drupal, for
instance, to report accessibility issues there are two special tags:
- Accessibility: it means that this is an accessibility issue (it could be
a bug, a feature request, a task, etc etc) ;
- "needs accessibility review": this means that the issue or the patch to
solve it needs to be tested by a blind user or an accessibility expert.

Now we could choose to use only the "accessibility" keyword or maybe both
"accessibility" and "needs accessibility review", I don't know; but also
using just the first keyword would be a great thing…

               Vincenzo.

Il giorno 31/ago/2012, alle ore 06:36, Rainer Bielefeld
<LibreOffice@bielefeldundbuss.de> ha scritto:

Ti tengo d'occhio schrieb:

in my opinion it would be great to have a component for accessibility;
it could let developers to better focus on accessibility bugs and, on
the other hand, blind people to know that accessibility is important for
this project and that submitting bug reports of this type is more than
encouraged…

Hi,

the advantage of an "Accessibility" Component would be that it can easily
be selected from a pulldown, no typos or other mistakes can happen.But a
problem is that an "Accessibility" Component would not indicate what
developer might be the one who can fix the problem. So it always would be
replaced during the bug triaging and fixing process.

An other possibility would be a Whiteboard entry, but that only can be
done after a report in a second step, typos might happen, it is too
modest.

So I currently think about a Bug Submission Assistant enhancement. We can
add a checkbox "Accessibility affected", and the Assistant will add
"Accessibility"
a) as additional pseudo key word to the Bug Summary line. The advantage
of this solution is that the key word would be very visible.
or
b) as additional pseudo key word to the whiteboard
or will
c) set Key word "Accessibility" to the Keyword pane (it should not be a
problem to get this new key word from FDO). The advantae of this solution
is that it also eases and unifies handling in Bugzilla itself, not only
via BSA.

And of course
d) New Component "Accessibility"
still can be discussed.

My order of preference (descending):
c - a - b - d

Your opinion?

When we have a solution here, we can start to mark and process
accessibility bugs with increased priority.

Best regards

Rainer


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
accessibility+help@global.libreoffice.org
Problems?
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/accessibility/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted



--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
accessibility+help@global.libreoffice.org
Problems?
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/accessibility/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted




--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
accessibility+help@global.libreoffice.org
Problems?
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/accessibility/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to accessibility+help@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/accessibility/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.