[potentially OT] UN resolutions in opaque PDF format

[MJ Ray]

"Alfred M. Szmidt" <ams at gnu.org> wrote:
>    http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1054944&group_id=103&atid=100103
>    was more than 2 years ago now.
>
> How about instead of whining, as you so often do, follow up on the
> bug?  This would do more good than bitching on a mailing list that the
> maintainers do not read.

I agree, and so that bug was emailed to the lead maintainer and to the
developers mailing list long before now.  Other people have also asked
after the bug (some last October, one this June) and still nothing.
Short of posting it in various other places that the maintainers
probably do not read, I don't see where to take it.  It's been in
their recommended bug tracker for two years, so some developer should
have seen it by now.

How about instead of flaming, actually suggesting new actions?  That
would do more good than vague suggestions to do what has already been
done.  Personally, I specify other mailing list software instead now
and put up with reconfiguring browsers each time I visit a site like
FSFE which runs unfixed pipermail.  (By the way, lists.gnu.org doesn't
use pipermail and individual list-admins can fix most listinfo pages
one by one, so it's not as big a problem there, but I doubt pipermail
was dropped for accessibility reasons.)

>    That's not uncommon: accessibility isn't usually taken seriously,
>    even in GNU.  :-(
>
> Oh helvetica, it is taken seriously in the GNU project.  Maybe if you
> properly followed up on the bugs it would be fixed sooner, the only
> person that can be blamed is you, nobody else.

Blaming people who suffer accessibility bugs is ridiculous and posting
that from @gnu is a great example of not taking accessibility
seriously.  What next?  Blaming David for the UN publishing
resolutions as bitmap PDFs, perhaps?

Amazed,
-- 
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Somerset, England. Work/Laborejo: http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
IRC/Jabber/SIP: on request/peteble