W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2010

SV: Microsoft PowerPoint accessibility

From: Morten Tollefsen <morten@medialt.no>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:56:01 +0200
Message-ID: <EDA91A2F291B104FA26F01B9300235E4550D17@mlt-server-01.medialt.local>
To: <accessys@smart.net>, "Phil Spencer" <spencer_phil@hotmail.com>
Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Hi!

ODF is OK on Linux, but doesn't work too good with screen readers on Windows. ODF is cross platform, but the same can be said for PPT actually. I know both formats pritty well and do not really understand that ODF offers a lot of more options. From an accessibility point of view a Norwegian study (2 years old) show that the formats are more or less comparable when focussing on accessibility.

I've personally been using PowerPoint with Jaws (and Window Eyes) for 10-15 years. For me this works quite well! Of course the same rules apply for PPT as for HTML: alternative text, suitable contrast, ...


Best regards

Morten Tollefsen
www.medialt.no, +47 908 99 305
MSN: mortentollefsen@hotmail.com, Skype: morten.tollefsen
twitter.com/mortentollefsen




-----Opprinnelig melding-----
Fra: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] På vegne av accessys@smart.net
Sendt: 13. august 2010 14:46
Til: Phil Spencer
Kopi: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Emne: Re: Microsoft PowerPoint accessibility


I much prefer OpenOffice.org  presentation, exactly the same output, even 
runs on powerpoint but has far more options and it is completely free and 
runs exactly the same on all operating systems (cross platform)  why build 
for windows when for  less work and money you can build for 
"apple/windows/linux/unix and others"

and personally it seems even more accessible

Bob


On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Phil Spencer wrote:

> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 12:53:29 +0100
> From: Phil Spencer <spencer_phil@hotmail.com>
> To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Subject: Microsoft PowerPoint accessibility
> Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 11:54:04 +0000
> Resent-From: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> 
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm interested in the general accessibility of Microsoft PowerPoint for
> the creation and editing of presentations. Thus far the information I've
> found on the web has been inconclusive, and I think the opinions of a wider group would be very useful.
>
> As part of a project I'm working on we're considering PowerPoint as part of a solution for the creation and editing of presentations. The rough idea is that there will be a web based library of pre-approved PowerPoint slides that users can package together to make a custom presentation, which they can further edit or customise offline using PowerPoint. However, if despite our best efforts to ensure the web based part of the solution is accessible it turns out that PowerPoint itself is a problem for some users then perhaps it's better that we consider some other options.
>
> Does anyone have any knowledge of how well PowerPoint works with different assisitive technologies?
>
> How "accessible" is PowerPoint considered to be in practice as an authoring tool?
>
> Or does anyone know of any resources discussing these issues?
>
> Any thoughts or suggestions would be very welcome.
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Phil Spencer.
>
Received on Friday, 13 August 2010 12:56:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:34 GMT