Based on what I'm reading here, I think gtk4/a11y state isn't yet ready for general use. Given that gtk3 isn't going anywhere soon AFAIK, we can wait to use gtk4 as a default. Thank you everyone for the information! -- Gwyn Ciesla she/her/hers ------------------------------------------------ in your fear, seek only peace in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie Sent with Proton Mail secure email. On Thursday, March 7th, 2024 at 3:40 PM, Michael Weghorn <m.weghorn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2024-03-07 09:33, Caolán McNamara wrote: > > > On Wed, 2024-03-06 at 21:58 +0000, Gwyn Ciesla wrote: > > > > > Interesting. Would you recommend waiting to set gtk4 as default, or > > > would doing so spur correction of extant issues? > > > > I don't really know. I'm not actively working on it anymore. IMO the > > a11y issues are more of an upstream gtk issue in the sense of a lack of > > a route to complete a11y integration, Michael Weghorn has far more of a > > grasp of the current state of that. > > > For gtk4 a11y, as Caolán mentioned, this currently lacks upstream Gtk > API to implement what's needed, see for example the discussion in these > Gtk issues: > > https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/issues/6272 > https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/issues/6204 > https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/issues/6269 > https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/issues/6197 > > The latter mentions a potential approach (in my perspective this would > feel more like a workaround ) to implement the low-level platform a11y > API (AT-SPI) directly in LO for things like the document content instead > of using (non-existing) Gtk API, but there are open questions for that > approach also.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
