4 ms·

The absence of a desired feature is not a bug. The author's situation is clearly very frustrating, but Chrome OS is intentionally minimalistic. Just one feature

The absence of a desired feature is not a bug. The author's situation is clearly very frustrating, but Chrome OS is intentionally minimalistic. Just one feature isn't going to result in bloat, but there are thousands of users who want just one feature. If he had bought an iPad Pro instead of a Chromebook, he would have been disappointed to learn that iOS doesn't support mice at all. A version of Chrome OS that supports every possible use-case and customisation is just linux. We already have linux. The issue tracker discussion seems reasonable to me. The UI team don't want to add and support the code necessary to facilitate the multitude of requests for remapping and shortcuts, so would prefer a suitable API for extensions. The kernel team have serious security concerns about such an API, because it would effectively permit keyloggers on the Chrome OS platform. On a practical level, I'd advise OP to install Crouton.

groxr 8y ago
Deliberately ignoring a simple accessibility feature request is unethical, a serious lapse in compliance to technical standards on accessibility, and possibly in violation of recently passed European legislation on the matter.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
dalbasal 8y ago
I agree Broadly speaking, you can go with a minimalist system or a powerful one. It's easier easier to make minimalist simple & intuitive with great defaults. The other option is powerful, where the system can do lots of things. Linux is powerful. Lots of exceptions, but the rule is trade-off. Accessibility is, almost by definition, suitability for rare-ish use cases. Rarity varies. Some people need a thumb mouse. Some need color schemes. Some need to operate a machine using only their eyes. Accessibility is, also almost by definition, achieved by adding optional features... A choice further along the "powerful & complex" end of the spectrum will tend to work better for a diverse accessibility goalset. "Simple yet powerful" is a design goal specifically because it is paradoxical.... like "light yet strong" or "affordable luxury." It means you made your trade-offs and have come out ahead.
ethbro 8y ago
> The issue tracker discussion seems reasonable to me. The UI team don't want to add and support the code necessary to facilitate the multitude of requests for remapping and shortcuts, so would prefer a suitable API for extensions. The kernel team have serious security concerns about such an API, because it would effectively permit keyloggers on the Chrome OS platform. ... And so nothing gets done. After encountering a few issues like this, it's why I no longer use Chrome on any device. I understand the Chrome team is incredibly busy. But especially on Chrome UX matters, user_request > UX_rejection > API_request > /dev/null seems an annoyingly common outcome.
DanBC 8y ago
> The absence of a desired feature is not a bug. It is a bug if it excludes disabled people.
- lowry 8y ago
  He is not officially disabled.
- sigzero 8y ago
  No, it's a feature request. However, if a change is what he wants then he needs to make it more visible and painfully so.
- bscphil 8y ago
  While it would be nice if every change that could help a disabled person could be considered a problem with the product until implemented, that's simply not possible. It's not possible for small teams, who don't have time to implement every feature, and it's not possible for large teams, who have to deal with problems like feature bloat in what is a very simple product from a UI point of view. Fortunately not everyone is forced to use Chrome.
  - tarboreus 8y ago
    Many people are forced to use it, especially in educational settings. In fact, this kind of accomodation is the law, at least in the United States. A long series of ADA lawsuits have forced platforms like Scribd and Kindle to make their platforms accessible. Unfortunately bringing these lawsuits is expensive and difficult and the battles have to be picked. Google doesn't have a great culture of accessibility, and yet more of their products are becoming required for educational and job settings.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
eganist 8y ago
> The absence of a desired feature is not a bug Considering the adoption of Chromebooks in government and public education spaces, Section 508 might disagree. I'm not a 508 expert, though. I pulled up the spec and though there isn't anything specific about remapping buttons on mice, I did find this: > 502.3.13 Modification of Focus Cursor. Focus, text insertion point, and selection attributes that can be set by the user shall be capable of being set programmatically, including through the use of assistive technology. It would seem, then, that the actual buttons mapped for accomplishing the above MUST be modifiable or remappable for 508 compliance. But I'm probably wrong. Someone check me on it: https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/communications-and-it/about-the-ict-refresh/final-rule/text-of-the-standards-and-guidelines https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/commun... --- Edit: commented directly on the feature thread. https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=221914#c33 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=221914...

groxr 8y ago

Deliberately ignoring a simple accessibility feature request is unethical, a serious lapse in compliance to technical standards on accessibility, and possibly in violation of recently passed European legislation on the matter.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

dalbasal 8y ago

I agree Broadly speaking, you can go with a minimalist system or a powerful one. It's easier easier to make minimalist simple & intuitive with great defaults. The other option is powerful, where the system can do lots of things. Linux is powerful. Lots of exceptions, but the rule is trade-off. Accessibility is, almost by definition, suitability for rare-ish use cases. Rarity varies. Some people need a thumb mouse. Some need color schemes. Some need to operate a machine using only their eyes. Accessibility is, also almost by definition, achieved by adding optional features... A choice further along the "powerful & complex" end of the spectrum will tend to work better for a diverse accessibility goalset. "Simple yet powerful" is a design goal specifically because it is paradoxical.... like "light yet strong" or "affordable luxury." It means you made your trade-offs and have come out ahead.

ethbro 8y ago

> The issue tracker discussion seems reasonable to me. The UI team don't want to add and support the code necessary to facilitate the multitude of requests for remapping and shortcuts, so would prefer a suitable API for extensions. The kernel team have serious security concerns about such an API, because it would effectively permit keyloggers on the Chrome OS platform. ... And so nothing gets done. After encountering a few issues like this, it's why I no longer use Chrome on any device. I understand the Chrome team is incredibly busy. But especially on Chrome UX matters, user_request > UX_rejection > API_request > /dev/null seems an annoyingly common outcome.

DanBC 8y ago

> The absence of a desired feature is not a bug. It is a bug if it excludes disabled people.

lowry 8y ago
He is not officially disabled.
sigzero 8y ago
No, it's a feature request. However, if a change is what he wants then he needs to make it more visible and painfully so.
bscphil 8y ago
While it would be nice if every change that could help a disabled person could be considered a problem with the product until implemented, that's simply not possible. It's not possible for small teams, who don't have time to implement every feature, and it's not possible for large teams, who have to deal with problems like feature bloat in what is a very simple product from a UI point of view. Fortunately not everyone is forced to use Chrome.
- tarboreus 8y ago
  Many people are forced to use it, especially in educational settings. In fact, this kind of accomodation is the law, at least in the United States. A long series of ADA lawsuits have forced platforms like Scribd and Kindle to make their platforms accessible. Unfortunately bringing these lawsuits is expensive and difficult and the battles have to be picked. Google doesn't have a great culture of accessibility, and yet more of their products are becoming required for educational and job settings.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

eganist 8y ago

> The absence of a desired feature is not a bug Considering the adoption of Chromebooks in government and public education spaces, Section 508 might disagree. I'm not a 508 expert, though. I pulled up the spec and though there isn't anything specific about remapping buttons on mice, I did find this: > 502.3.13 Modification of Focus Cursor. Focus, text insertion point, and selection attributes that can be set by the user shall be capable of being set programmatically, including through the use of assistive technology. It would seem, then, that the actual buttons mapped for accomplishing the above MUST be modifiable or remappable for 508 compliance. But I'm probably wrong. Someone check me on it: https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/communications-and-it/about-the-ict-refresh/final-rule/text-of-the-standards-and-guidelines https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/commun... --- Edit: commented directly on the feature thread. https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=221914#c33 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=221914...