Robert Schweikert wrote:
On 03/29/2013 01:31 PM, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
On 03/29/2013 03:58 PM, Robert Schweikert wrote:
There is a symbolic "value" to this correct. However as a11y bugs would always be at least "Major" it should have an impact on how these bugs are treated. Secondly having a category makes it obvious for those filing the bugs where they belong.
Why should they be "Major" by default? We have definitions on what the severity means and I strongly object to make any category by default Major. Let's stick to the definitions we have and not change them for one category,
This strikes at the heart of the issue.
A simple example to demonstrated the problem. When there is a bug that does not allow the login manager to be audible our current criteria would not capture this as a critical bug. However to the user that is dependent on this to be able to use the system the bug is basically the same as if the kernel crashed, a kernel crash of course falls under the critical category. Therefore, an issue that may appear to be minor to those without handicap may have profound effects on people that depend on a11y functionality.
Doesn't that go for all kinds of different issues - ie. to those who depend on them they're serious, to those who don't, they're not?
There is somewhat of a disconnect between the existing severities and the impact w.r.t. a11y. We should address this disconnect.
What is the significance of the severity today, if any at all? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (1.8°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free DNS hosting, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org