- 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.
Attachments
- image/gif attachment: image001.gif
Received on Friday, 1 February 2013 20:55:10 UTC