- From: Kelly Ford <kelly@kellford.com>
- Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2001 20:01:39 -0400 (EDT)
- To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
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 <http://www.issound.com/pwwebspeak/index.htm>. 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. Kelly 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