W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2015

RE: Ubuntu on a dial up modem with Lynx (RE: PDF accessibility guidelines. WAS: Re: PDF's and Signatures)

From: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 16:32:06 -0800
To: <accessys@smart.net>
Cc: <olaflist@callassoftware.com>, "'WAI Interest Group'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, "'Howard'" <howard_leicester@btconnect.com>, "'Duff Johnson'" <duff@duff-johnson.com>, "'Adam Cooper'" <cooperad@bigpond.com>
Message-ID: <01f201d03a91$d8ba6eb0$8a2f4c10$@ca>
accessys@smart.net wrote:
>
>
> you totally misunderstand what I was saying.

I've quoted you inline, so it is your words.

>
> the Ford vs other vehicles is the same as saying it works on windows
> but not mac or BSD or unix or linux

Who, besides you, raised the question of Operating System? Certainly not I -
I changed the subject line to "Ubuntu on a dial-up line with Lynx", and
every subsequent point I made was predicated on that subject line.

My point, and one that I will not mince words about, is that suggesting that
to be "accessible" it must work in Lynx has been refuted and dismissed
countless times, save for a few holdouts. And while I will accept that
accessing content today over dial-up, using Firefox and Orca on Ubuntu will
likely be a painfully slow experience, it still is not denying access to
anyone.

This leads back to my basic premise: that there exists a Social Contract
between user and content creator, and both need to meet in the middle: the
developer uses modern web development techniques, and the end user keeps
relatively current with their software, and uses the right tools for the
job. Lynx is sadly no longer an appropriate tool for much if not most of the
web.

>
> and you think I am being hard, I have a modern computer with Broadband
> access and dozens of ways to access the net, BUT and this is a very
> important but,  too many people do not have this level of access

Citation please. You cannot make a broad statement like that without proof:
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." -
Hitchens's razor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitchens%27s_razor)

> and
> while I personally rarely use lynx much anymore I know quite a few
> people who do because it is what works reliably with their screen
> readers.

There are close to 7.3 billion people on the planet
(http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/) and "quite a few" is a hard
number to gauge that against.

What I do know is that people who are actively working on contemporary
screen readers today are focusing their efforts on supporting modern
GUI-based browsers (and I know/say this based upon the fact that I
personally know both lead developers of NVDA - not well, but well enough -
as well as the lead engineer for Orca - again not well, but well enough).

I can also purchase a buggy whip from Amazon
(http://www.amazon.com/Weaver-Buggy-Whip/dp/B00DL3ZU76), but I cannot get
one at my local Wal-Mart store - the forces of supply and demand being what
they are. I think it is a relevant analogy.

>
> and what is so hard about CSS not trying to limit the intenet but not
> trying to exclude people either.

HUH? Who mentioned CSS?

This thread started out as a not-so-friendly, almost strident repudiation of
PDF, and then the subject line changed to "Ubuntu on a dial up modem with
Lynx".

What does CSS have to do with either topic? And even if I did bite, how does
CSS "try to exclude people"?

JF
Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2015 00:32:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:54 UTC