W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-indie-ui@w3.org > February 2013

RE: [user-context] What are the use cases for exposing screen reader or magnifier version info?

From: Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL <ryladog@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 15:54:44 -0500
To: "'Richard Schwerdtfeger'" <schwer@us.ibm.com>, "'Jason White'" <jason@jasonjgw.net>
Cc: <public-indie-ui@w3.org>
Message-ID: <099b01ce00be$5d5857a0$180906e0$@gmail.com>
I agree with Rich on this, legally in certain countries this could be
prohibited.

 

 

 

 

* katie *

Katie Haritos-Shea 


Section 508 and WCAG 2 

Senior Systems Engineer, SME & Technical Policy Analyst




703-371-5545

ryladog@gmail.com

People may forget exactly what it was that you said or did, 
but people will never forget how you made them feel.......

Our scars remind us of where we have been........they do not have to dictate
where we are going.

 

From: Richard Schwerdtfeger [mailto:schwer@us.ibm.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 3:10 PM
To: Jason White
Cc: public-indie-ui@w3.org
Subject: Re: [user-context] What are the use cases for exposing screen
reader or magnifier version info?

 

I am extremely worried about privacy issues around exposing the AT a person
is using.

Rich


Rich Schwerdtfeger

Inactive hide details for Jason White ---12/06/2012 08:04:19 PM---James
Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote:Jason White ---12/06/2012 08:04:19 PM---James
Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote:

From: Jason White <jason@jasonjgw.net>
To: public-indie-ui@w3.org, 
Date: 12/06/2012 08:04 PM
Subject: Re: [user-context] What are the use cases for exposing screen
reader  or magnifier version info?

  _____  




James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote:

> Assistive technology vendors are not beholden to W3C specifications (and
> most AT vendors are notoriously uninvolved in the standardization
process),
> so exposing this information when it's absolutely necessary, (and only
with
> user content), is one attempt to reduce the unreliability of AT interfaces
> on the Web.

At a Web accessibility conference last week, a content author mentioned this
to me as a highly desired feature due to bugs and limitations (often
version-specific) in various screen readers.

I am concerned however that the information is open to misuse: content
authors
may start designing for the "most popular" ATs instead of writing according
to
spec. They can also ascertain which ATs are "most popular" for their
particular content by gathering data, which is not possible now, since the
name/version of the AT are not revealed.

Thus I have decidedly mixed feelings about this proposal and, frankly, I'm
not
sure whether the practical benefits of being able to work around certain
bugs/differences outweigh the opportunity to "design for the UA and AT
implementation" instead of designing to standards.








image001.gif
(image/gif attachment: image001.gif)

Received on Friday, 1 February 2013 20:55:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 1 February 2013 20:55:11 GMT