Re: A scenario

I'm not making myself clear.  If on a technical level, there is a
universal standard set in place for certain types of behavior of browsers,
then the screenreader developpers can use that model to extract the
information needed.  Windows.95 for instance can be readily used by people
with screenreaders in its basic form because of this focus.  This was my
point scot.  As I see it, we are reducing the need for code writing by the
screenreader developpers here and asking the browser developpers to
standardize on a set perhaps to be developped in the future.
annother point to keep in mind here is that if you put the onus on the
screenreader developper, unless you give them a fair amount of lead time,
the screen reader user will always lag behind everyone else when it comes
to upgrading and may even need to switch screenreaders in order to save
their job just because of the browser.  I think the name screenreader is a
missnomer here the correct name is or should be speaking or braille
computer interface.  The screen reader should be asked to present the
information in a way that the user can use it, but it is up to the
software developper to make it possible for the screenreader to do that to
a point at least.  Perhaps what we need is a library that each browser
company can use to make it possible for screenreaders to see what is going
on and then to determine how to present that to the user.


On Wed, 11 Mar 1998, Scott Luebking wrote:

> Hi,
> I disagree with your point for a couple of reasons.  First, how
> much work will the developer have to go through to write and debug
> the code to use the information provided by the browser?  This
> may or not may be trivial.  My other concern is what are the advantages
> to the blind user to have the feature provided by the screen access
> technology versus the browser?  I might be wrong about this, but I don't
> believe that the blind browser user will want the browser functionality changed
> out from under them each time they switch screen reader.  Do you think
> that blind users want this?
> 
> Scott
> 
> 
> > your statement about screenreader developpers duplicating each others work
> > may make the last point moot because if the browser provides the propper
> > information to the third party device, the only thing the third party
> > device needs to do is be sure to take advantage of it.  perhaps we need to
> > develop annother third party device to go between but that may be a topic
> > for another time and annother list.
> > I'd say the strongest case can be made for features that can benefit all.
> > I'd also say that many features benefitting one using a screenreader can
> > probably benefit all even if that eans that the feature need be adapted to
> > fit annother catagory.
> 

Hands-On-Technolog(eye)s
touching the internet
voice: 1-(301) 949-7599
poehlman@clark.net
ftp://ftp.clark.net/pub/poehlman
http://www.clark.net/pub/poehlman

Received on Wednesday, 11 March 1998 15:08:47 UTC