W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2001

Re: How accessible is Netscape?

From: Kelly Ford <kelly@kellford.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 20:01:39 -0400 (EDT)
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0107071942020.17147-100000@ns.shellworld.net>
A couple points of clarification:

1. IBM Home Page Reader 3.0, the version that has been out for quite
sometime, requires Internet Explorer, not Netscape.

2. Webspeak is a dead product.  See

3. I would look to the future, not the past, for Netscape accessibility
efforts.  Aaron Leventhal gave some good info on plans in the area earlier
in this thread.

On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, jeffrey Pledger wrote:

> Dave,
> What about using another product like IBM's home page reader or another
> speech enabled browser software.  I do believe that they work quite well
> with netscape as the underlying browser.  Netscape as a whole has not been
> very cooperative in making their browser accessible for screen readers,
> hence the development of using a product like IBM's home page reader.  it
> is compatible with all of the screen reader software that is currently
> available.  Webspeak is another piece of software which does the same as
> IBM home page reader.  Just a thought.
> Jeffrey Pledger
> President, AbleTV At 02:16 PM 7/3/01 -0400, David Poehlman wrote:
> >Hello Martha and all,
> >
> >I've used Netscape in the past and in its day before ie became
> >accessible and the assistive technologies became a better fit for it and
> >vice versa, due in part at least, to the introduction of and
> >improvements in Microsoft Active Accessibility (MSAA).
> >
> >I would hope but cannot provide an official response on this that the
> >most accessible choice would rule the roost and that choices where
> >possible are allowed whatever that choice needs to be at any given time.
> >As netscape continues to move in its current direction, it seems to be
> >more and more difficult for assistive technologies to support.  I
> >stopped using it when 6 came out.  I also found that for me at least
> >that even though I could stick with an older version, more and more
> >pages were making a better fit with ie but that is another matter.
> >
> >Lastly, to make matters more complicated, I understand that it is not
> >always just a matter of subbing one browser for another but that there
> >network infrastructure considerations that may make this not possible or
> >practical so as someone asked me and I now ask here, How much resource
> >is too much.
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Martha Wilkes" <Martha.Wilkes@sas.com>
> >To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> >Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 1:57 PM
> >Subject: How accessible is Netscape?
> >
> >
> >The task of getting any web page to behave consistently across browsers
> >is incredibly difficult already, as all the web designers and developers
> >on the list are well aware. What does accessibility add to the equation?
> >This issue came up in terms of testing for 508 compliance. How much
> >should we focus on Netscape?
> >
> >Many of our customers use Netscape exclusively, and we were wondering if
> >those customers (many of which are government agencies, universities,
> >etc.) will be able to meet accessibility guidelines if they use only
> >Netscape. The greater question: will their users be able to choose the
> >technology that best suits them (which just might be IE for certain
> >users, correct?), regardless of the agency's purchasing agreements?
> >
> >I have not had much luck finding out any information on Netscape's web
> >site. Thanks in advance for any information you can provide.
> >
> >martha
> >
> >martha.wilkes@sas.com | 919.531.1416
Received on Saturday, 7 July 2001 20:02:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:13 UTC