A slight nuance: Yes, I absolutely agree that Arcan is winning on a11y features overall; I'll go stronger and say that it doesn't just exceed Wayland, I think it's better than X was. What I meant specifically is that I want to see if it's backwards compatible with at least some of the tools I use on X, because it looks like (especially from this post) Arcan might be able to hand existing tools an X-compatible interface (doing actual access control and everything behind the scenes but that's all invisible to the tools using this interface) and let me keep using what I already have without having to (re)write anything new. As an example: On X, I can use `xdotool type --window $WINDOW_ID "sometext"` to type into a window even if it's not active. On Wayland, your best hope is that you happen to be using a compositor that's implemented some nonstandard API to do that. My hope is that Arcan implements enough of X that you can make it work, albeit probably with some explicit permission-granting.

Of course, Arcan looks good enough, and actually exposes enough API surface, that if it's not compatible with my existing tools then yes I probably will write whatever I need over its native APIs and just run with that. But it'd be nice if I didn't even need to do that:)