WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Browser version advice in accessibility statement

for

From: Christophe Strobbe
Date: Nov 4, 2011 12:06PM

Hi Aaron,

At 16:54 4-11-2011, Aaron Leventhal wrote:
>(...)
>
>Target audience:
>1. If targeting the broad public (e.g. a government website), it seems
>necessary to stay on the safe side.
>2. If targeting advanced technology users (e.g. a high tech company), it
>seems reasonable to use ARIA a lot more, and to require a more advanced
>browser - screen reader combo for content outside of the basics
>(documentation, support, etc.)
>
>Safe -- content for the broader public, or is primarily static HTML:
>� IE7+ with JAWS 7+, NVDA 2011.1+ or Window-Eyes 5.5+, Hal (version?),
>System Access (version?), etc.
>� Firefox 3.6 + with JAWS 7+, NVDA 2011.1+, Window-Eyes 5.5+
>� Safari 4+ with VoiceOver on Snow Leopard or later
>� Mobile Safari and VoiceOver on iOS 4 or later

This list reminds me of a similar list I wrote
last year (in deliverable D3.1.2 for the AEGIS
project; PDF at <http://tinyurl.com/6jjw8pz>;):

* Internet Explorer 7 with JAWS 9 on Windows XP
with Service Pack 3 (older versions of Internet
Explorer and JAWS have no support for WAI-ARIA),
* Firefox 3.0 with JAWS 9 on Windows XP with
Service Pack 3 (Firefox 2 also supported MSAA and early drafts of WAI-ARIA),
* Firefox 3.0 with Window-Eyes 5.5 on Windows XP with Service Pack 3,
* Internet Explorer 7 with MAGic 11 on Windows XP with Service Pack 3,
* Internet Explorer 7 with ZoomText 9 on Windows XP with Service Pack 3,
* Safari 3 on Mac OS X 10.5 with VoiceOver,
* Firefox 3.0 with Orca on Ubuntu 8.04 LTS ("Hardy Heron"),
* Firefox 3.0 with GNOME's built-in magnifiers on
Ubuntu 8.04 LTS ("Hardy Heron").

This list was intended for creating accessibility
support documentation ("accessibility support" as
defined by WCAG 2.0), hence JAWS 9 instead of
JAWS 7. (JAWS 7 is still in use, even in
countries with refund schemes for assistive technologies, e.g. Belgium.)

Best regards,

Christophe


>Full -- content for a high tech audience or must be dynamic by its nature:
>� IE8+ with JAWS 10+ (unfortunately there is no live region support in
>NVDA+IE)
>� Firefox 3.6+ with JAWS 10+ or NVDA 2011.1+
>� Safari 5+ with VoiceOver on Lion or later
>� Mobile browsers: to be determined
>
>(...)
>Thoughts?
>
>Aaron
>
>On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Kevin White < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I have a client who is doing some excellent work on creating an inclusive
> > and engaging website. In order to do so they are drawing on the features
> > provided in WAI-ARIA. This leads to some difficulties regarding browser and
> > screen reader compatibility and we discussed how to address this. My
> > personal opinion is to use part of the accessibility statement to highlight
> > the efforts but point out the need for users to upgrade but I was curious
> > to understand how people view this?
> >
> > My opinion is based on the idea that ARIA provides the opportunity to help
> > users of assistive technologies but in order to do that there is a need to
> > use a modern browser. User may not know this and by providing information
> > around this there is an opportunity to provide wider help.
> >
> > I would be interested to hear any other views on this,
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Kevin


--
Christophe Strobbe
K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD
Research Group on Document Architectures
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442
B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee
BELGIUM
tel: +32 16 32 85 51
http://www.docarch.be/
Twitter: @RabelaisA11y
---
Open source for accessibility: results from the
AEGIS project www.aegis-project.eu
---
Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or
other "social networks". You may have agreed to
their "privacy policy", but I haven't.