In reply to Leonardo Losoviz.

I'm a little suspicious about this "person who said they were switching to squarespace because of accesibility". Actually more than a little suspicious. What user concerned with the topic of accesibility and in touch enough to know about the working group would then choose squarespace?

Do any of us recognise this as a typical user, or dev, or stakeholder? I could list 20 more common user types before this one.

Eg: the user moving to a static site generator. The user sticking on 4.9. The user into forks. The user looking at the API for solutions.

Now, me personally I have seen the shape of gutenberg and I myself have said I choose "another pagebuilder". Perhaps Mat refers to me. If thats the case then I'll clarify. For Accesibility I'll use 4.9. For visually adept pagebuilder clients I will use DiviBuilder. Why? Its a far superior UI to the API when considered like for like. I am aware thats off topic of accesibility but as I've said elsewhere I think a GUI pagebuilder is not a good tool solution for visually impaired peopl and a new API interface should be considered. And for the visually adept, Gutenberg is not competitive.