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

Re: Rockville, MD- Seeking low vision users for testing federal website

From: Access Systems <accessys@smart.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:33:22 -0500 (EST)
To: Joe Clark <joeclark@joeclark.org>
cc: WAI-IG <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0212172318500.24209-100000@smarty.smart.net>

On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Joe Clark wrote:

> > authoring to browser behavior is a common error, not one that anyone has
> > been accused of doing. it was an example of an often discovered problem
> There's still no *evidence*, merely repeated supposition.

sufficient ancedotal reporting to suspect actual problems
> > No, but cost and the prerequisites are a significant factor, if one has
> > the money and the correct prerequisites then it may be the best choice,
> > but if you are like the vast majority of people with disability you live
> > below the norm and a significant majority below the poverty level.  not
> > even mentioning the 3rd world, which is where the vast majority of
> > disabled people actually live
> My point is unchanged. The only outcome of this philosophy is to
> give adaptive technology away on demand.

NO! the point is web sites should be designed to work on ALL adaptive
browsers not ONLY the most expensive.  
  and much adaptive technology is given away, nothing against anyone
trying to sell it, but don't by design limit it to the software that cost
> > something designed for Jaws or Windows Eyes may not be usable by people
> > using non proprietary software, but something designed for Open Source or
> > other accessibilty solution can be used by Jaws and Windows Eyes
> Name two open-source screen readers that handle Web pages as well as
> Jaws or Window-Eyes. And work on common operating systems. And can
> be acquired and installed today.

and explain how Jaws or Window-Eyes work on a Mac, or Uinx operating
system, or on a 286 with 100mb harddrive and 10mb Ram???
  heck explain how Jaws or Window-Eyes will work on my Pentium with a
dual hard drive 40gb/4gb and the latest and greatest Red Hat 8.0 OS, and
logging onto the web in Lynx (latest version)  

it works both ways 

> > I disagree, sub-optimal testing is frequently broadcast as the
> diffinative > answer, check all the constant changing of eating
> recommendations, or the > argument over various needs for medical
> testing...
> Let's not check those. Let's stay on topic.

was using some major Non computer examples, didn't want to discuss em, but
sometimes showing a non computer example is usefull

> Read my book chapter for the details.

chapter and verse??
> >  if you test those who use JAWS (for example) how does this affect someone
> > who has an obsolete computer and can't afford to purchase a new computer
> > to get the new software that is needed to run this latest and greatest
> > solution,  accessibility is for EVERYONE not one particular solution.
> Only if accessibility were as common as oxygen, and equally free of
> charge.

Oxygen is not that common and certainly not free, but less expensive than
having purified tanked air in a hermetically sealed enviorenment.

> > how much extra does it cost to test with a "free" or open source solution
> > to the problem...
> I'm still waiting for the names of two open-source screen readers
> that handle Web pages as well as Jaws or Window-Eyes. And work on
> common operating systems. And can be acquired and installed today.

and I'm still waiting for you to explain how they work on a Mac or Unix

  for less than $100 I can put a top of the line Linux operating system on
a computer that won't even run Jaws, and get it talking in emacspeak..it
works both ways....

I understand your bias, and sell JAWS to the big corporations but at least
allow the little smuck in his subsidized apt running a donated second line
computer on his dial up regular telephone to access the web too.  Because
there are a lot more of the later, and the census is the evidence of that.


   ASCII Ribbon Campaign                        accessBob                       
    NO HTML/PDF/RTF in e-mail                   accessys@smartnospam.net       
    NO MSWord docs in e-mail                    Access Systems, engineers       
    NO attachments in e-mail,  *LINUX powered*   access is a civil right 
THIS message and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be
privileged.  They are intended ONLY for the individual or entity named
above. If you are not the intended recipient, Please notify the sender as
soon as possible. Please DO NOT READ, COPY, USE, or DISCLOSE this
communication to others and DELETE it from your computer systems.  Thanks
Received on Tuesday, 17 December 2002 23:33:14 UTC

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