Hello, completed first sign-in.

I believe I moved the article properly and all content is there, I also checked the preview and adapted the page.

Link to preview is here: https://fedoramagazine.org/?p=40083&preview=true

@modehnal I've done an edit pass on your article and I believe only done a small number of changes to wording, capitalization, and sentence structure. However, I did add a link to explain what Atspi means in the section titled "What is Accessibility". If you have a better link or place to insert that, please change it.

This would be a good time for you to review the document to ensure that the changes haven't changed your intended meaning. Just in case.

The only change I would ask you to make is to the screen capture images in the "Examples of an automation suite output files" section. At their current size (as embedded images) they are hard to read. If you add them to the media library and insert them into your article from there, we can make them a link to that image. The reader will be able to select the image and it will be displayed in another window in a larger more readable format. If you have questions about that let us know.

Also, if you have ideas for the featured image, let us know. If not, the editors will created one for the article.

Thank you for your work. We appreciate it.

I've added a tentative featured image.

Thank you for the edit pass, it looks good, I have only a few notes.

The link you added is good but not in a good place so I changed it. The AT-SPI is a set of interfaces which is what the content of the link explains, while Atspi is specific python module we are using.

Some sentences are now starting with lower capital letter, for example 'dogtail is...' or 'behave provides...'. Is this alright? For some reason it looks strange to me. I am not against it but I just wanted to express my worry.

I remade the screenshots, added them to the media library and attached images from there so it should show better now.

The feature image is alright, I am not against it.

I do also have one question for the Examples part. Is there a way to format the text better with some colors? The community blog page had those colors and it was more readable. Is there a way to do the same for the magazine? I was not able to make it work.

Thank you!

Your link to AT-SPI is good, thank you.

I chose to italicize the names for behave and dogtail as programming elements and eliminated the article "the" in front of them each time. When I investigated dogtail I found that the usage on the git repo was "dogtail", lower case, so I carried that through the article as a proper noun.
https://github.com/vhumpa/dogtail
I discovered the same for behave.
https://github.com/behave/behave?tab=readme-ov-file#behave
If a person's name is "jack" I would leave it as "jack" even if it looks wrong. :-)

My justification for the image (at least to myself) is that it was a drum with metal pegs driven mechanically to rotate and was part of either a music box or perhaps a loom (?). Hence it was automation of a sort. I understand if it doesn't suit your tastes and I can simply go with a plain background if you prefer. I'm not offended in any way if you don't care for it.

You may change the color of text if you choose. But be aware that there might be accessibility issues for some people if certain colors are used. To change the color of individual words or lines, first select them. Then, in the tool bar that appears, select the options item (black highlighted downward arrow) and look for the "Highlight" option. That should let you change either the foreground or background. You can do a similar thing to blocks of text by selecting "Block" in the right hand menu and look for the "Color" option. We don't have an automated code colorizer as far as I can tell.

That sounds reasonable for the names.

The image is good, better than something plain I would think, thank you.

For the color of the code, since there is not any automated code colorizer which I was looking for, I will not be doing any adjustments by hand. Lets keep it like this.

I think it is finalized, what are the next steps?

@modehnal Nothing more is needed on your side.

I did one more pass through the article to catch anything I might have missed and to make certain all the links and videos were functional.

I've schedule this to be published tomorrow 9 April 08:00 UTC.

Thank you very much for contributing to the Fedora Magazine

I saw that the article was published, thank you for your help!

@rlengland I have a question hopefully it's alright to ask here.

I saw a comment on the article, that I replied to. My response was marked as "Awaiting Moderation" or something of that kind. Now when I reloaded the page my comment is gone. Is there a rule I broke or perhaps I did something wrong that caused the comment to get removed? I have got no email or any notification so I have no idea why the comment is gone.

@modehnal You didn't do anything wrong. All comments are held for moderation. Though I thought the site permissions allowed authors to comment on their own articles without moderation. Anyway, I've just approved your comment.

Thank you.

Is there a way to edit the article after publishing? I just noticed that something happened to the dot lists.

The list item dots seem wrongly placed. As if they were moved a little to the left. They are outside of the header text and if you look at the Disadvantages section it can be seen how moved they are even though the last two items seem to be placed correctly but as a whole it seems like something got moved.

There were "groups" created in some fashion that disconnected the header indentation from the bullet items. I'm not sure what caused it. I've removed the extra grouping and hopefully that has corrected things for you.

Thank you! Looks very good now.

Hi, I just noticed a mistake in the article, would it be possible to do a small change?

From:
Let us start wit the very core of our ability. Accessibility.

To:
Let us start with the very core of our ability. Accessibility.

It seems that somehow over the many times I reread the article I did not notice the missing H in the word WITH.

Thank you.

No problem. It's been fixed.