Re: [Audio-video] http://audio-video.gnu.org/video/ghm2013/Samuel_Thibault_Jean-Philippe_Mengual-Freedom_0_for_everybody_really_.text

[MENGUAL Jean-Philippe]

Everything that a program can do, that some person wants it to do, is a 
functionality.

I don't think here the code can do something or enables the user to do, 
it is just clean. And that, it's a form of accessibility. And it's the 
point where we can agree because I don't think a free program should be 
accessible by shipping functionalities; it should be accessible because 
its code is also clean (widgets with labels, label on objects).  To sum 
up: accessibility=design/compatibility first, because mandatory to run 
any assistive functionality. And this part of the issue can be a common 
matter between us.



But there is no point arguing about the meaning of "functionality", 
because all that does is distort the meaning of what I said. In effect, 
you are trying to block clear communication between us. Even if an 
argument could prove that the word "functionality" should mean something 
different, it would not change my position. I would just state it with 
some other word.

But it is a fundamental concept actually. Because if accessibility is 
not a functionality but a way to do to "free" users, the campaign cannot 
destroy free software, only create a sensitivity.

You say:
"

We reject the idea that we should refuse to free anyone
until the day that we can free everyone.

We reject this approach too, and it's not our approach.
 We will free those we can free with whatever we have got.
Our chances of helping the disabled some day are bigger
if we strengthen our movement as much as we can."

ok. Why couldn't we have a common approach saying: Yes, your program is free 
giving to the user the four fundamental freedoms against oppression by State. 
But to go beyond the oppression, maximize the freedom 0 consequence and make a 
program promoting freedom, equality, brotherhood (fraternity), it should be 
designed to be potentially accessible by any user.

(For me, Liberty, Equality and Brotherhood are not fully satisfied without a11y and are 
another way to fight oppression as in a "communities" world, less place for 
oppression).

Do you agree such approach? Otherwise, if we don't have such common approach, 
what danger do you identify if we say this, defending so same ideas as FSF, 
with a new further dimension (very modern anyway).


Sincerely,


Sincerely,


Regards,