W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2002

Re: not jaws, just inaccessible:Fw: Inaccessible Web sites

From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 16:53:03 -0400
To: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-id: <005701c20689$a97be330$91e03244@DAVIDPOEHLMAN>
and some of these pop up stoppers can cause problems for systems with
screen readers due to resource issues.  Now, we are getting way afield
but this is not a screen reader issue necessarily as is pointed out

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Woolley" <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: not jaws, just inaccessible:Fw: Inaccessible Web sites

> Ok, I'll give you that, but how is ad freezing be the responsibility
of a
> screen reader? Why wouldn't a screen reader user use the same software
> a sighted person would use (such as Proxomitron, RJT, JunkBuster, or
> Guidescope) to stop refreshing ads?

For the same reasons that the sighted person wouldn't use it:

- any add on software constitutes a technicality barrier for most users;
- it may require additional clearances from network administrators;
- many network administrators may refuse it because sites heavy in
  ads often have terms of use that forbid the use of banner blocking
- the machine may be a shared resource and the network administrator may
  not want to impose such a policy for all users.

On the other hand, a sighted user can much more easily ignore or dismiss
the adverts (although people with some perception disorders may get
confused as well).

Popups are much more of a problem for blind users, but they are no more
technically oriented than sighted users.
Received on Tuesday, 28 May 2002 16:53:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:19 UTC