E-mail List Archives
Thread: RE: repetitive navigation
Number of posts in this thread: 7 (In chronological order)
From: Philip Pawley
Date: Wed, Feb 19 2003 12:11PM
Subject: RE: repetitive navigation
No previous message | Next message →
Hi Leo,
<snip>
>I really like the idea of using the pseudo-class :focus to accomplish
>the appearing "skip to...." link when tabbing.
Don't forget that you need to use :active as well.
:focus doesn't work in Internet Explorer and :active doesn't work in Netscape Gecko.
<snip>
>I also like the idea of being able to skip back and forth between
>main content and navigation.
>
>As far as hiding the skip to link in NS4 completely, this seems like
>a good idea based on the fact that the keyboard focus does not
>skip in this browser, as it should.
>
>I am assuming you would use display:none to achieve that, which
>would effectively hide it completely from keyboard access, but still
>make it available to screen reader users who, of course, would still
>find it useful (unless display:none also hides content from screen
>readers?)
I was under the impression that screen readers only worked in conjunction with Internet Explorer. It would be worth looking into, but ...
Given that the makers of these things don't seem prepared to let web developers test their sites without paying a hefty fee, I feel inclined to let them get on with it.
Frankly, they _deserve_ a WWW that doesn't work with their gadgets.
I was, at one time, under the impression, that at least JAWS would work for forty minutes and then stop unless you re-booted - which would be fair comment. Then I found that my JAWS demo packed up altogether.
I was then given to believe that the cut-down version: Connect Outloud would carry on working (though I hadn't yet found the time really get to grips with it).
I fired it up just now in response to your comment, only to be greeted with the message that it would pack up after 24 hours working time. How are we supposed even to learn how it works, let alone test on a continuing basis under such circumstances?
I'm really browned off. Are the only valuable sites the ones developed by full-time developers who could justify the expense of buying, JAWS, Window Eyes and Home Page Reader?
Please forgive the rant. :-) No, sorry, I can't manage a smile. :-(
<snip>
>Thanks for the technique Philip.
Thanks for your comments, Leo. :-)
All the best,
--
Philip Pawley
Liverpool, UK
http://www.alexanderworks.org.uk/
--
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
From: Jim Thatcher
Date: Wed, Feb 19 2003 2:10PM
Subject: On JAWS demo. Was RE: repetitive navigation
← Previous message | Next message →
Rant away, but best that that rant be based on fact. Freedom Scientific's
policy of timed demonstration is, in my opinion, extremely generous. Full
function JAWS runs for 40 minutes and then you have to reboot your computer.
For someone who is not blind and wants to test with a screen reader, it is
hard to imagine a better deal. I don't know what problems you had, but it
sounds like user error to me.
Jim
508 Web Accessibility Tutorial http://jimthatcher.com/webcourse1.htm.
"Constructing Accessible Web Sites:" http://jimthatcher.com/news.htm
From: Philip Pawley
Date: Wed, Feb 19 2003 3:19PM
Subject: Re: On JAWS demo. Was RE: repetitive navigation
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Jim,
You wrote:
>Rant away, but best that that rant be based on fact.
Quite.
>Freedom Scientific's
>policy of timed demonstration is, in my opinion, extremely generous. Full
>function JAWS runs for 40 minutes and then you have to reboot your computer.
>For someone who is not blind and wants to test with a screen reader, it is
>hard to imagine a better deal.
That's what I thought when mine was working like that. Nonetheless, when I tried to run JAWS again a few weeks (maybe months) later it gave me an expiration message. I got the self-same message when I tried to re-install it now on receiving your post.
The message reads:-
"This demo of JAWS has expired. Call your local access technology dealer or contact Freedom Scientific at 727-803-8000 or = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = to purchase your fully-licensed version of JAWS."
I can send you a screen-shot if you like.
> I don't know what problems you had, but it
>sounds like user error to me.
User error? Me? Never! :-)
Ser
From: John Foliot - bytown internet
Date: Wed, Feb 19 2003 6:14PM
Subject: RE: repetitive navigation
← Previous message | Next message →
>
> Please forgive the rant. :-) No, sorry, I can't manage a smile. :-(
Actually, Philip, no I won't.
JAWs is but one adaptive technology, as is Connect Outloud, IBM HPR, Window
Eyes, etc. Accessibility is about more than making something available to
any one specific technology, it's about any and all technologies. There is
a fairly extensive list of alternative browsers available at
http://www.w3.org/WAI/References/Browsing : a resource I might add that is
specifically geared towards helping developers of all stripes "get on with
it". One browser in particular, Simply Web 2000, is... wait... FREE
(http://www.econointl.com/sw/). However, be forewarned, you get what you
pay for. (It works fine, but is minimal at best). Also, unlike JAWs (which
interacts with all Windows applications) it is nothing more than a "talking"
browser.
The point is, if you feel you need to hear your site to ensure you've not
missed anything, fair enough. But to somehow feel that you are being
short-changed or put upon by software companies who require that they
actually be paid for their software is plain ridiculous - do you work for
free? You can be commended for caring enough to look into accessible
development, whether as a full time occupation or simply a hobby, but there
is no such thing as a free lunch! Like anything in life, if you wish to
succeed there is a required investment; be it time, money, effort, or all
three. The up side of all of this is that should you become accomplished in
this field, you will be one of a very few, making your services all that
more valuable...
JF
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
From: Philip Pawley
Date: Wed, Feb 19 2003 7:39PM
Subject: RE: repetitive navigation
← Previous message | Next message →
John,
See my replies in-line.
<snip>
>JAWs is but one adaptive technology, as is Connect Outloud, IBM HPR, Window
>Eyes, etc. Accessibility is about more than making something available to
>any one specific technology, it's about any and all technologies. There is
>a fairly extensive list of alternative browsers available at
>http://www.w3.org/WAI/References/Browsing : a resource I might add that is
>specifically geared towards helping developers of all stripes "get on with
>it". One browser in particular, Simply Web 2000, is... wait... FREE
>(http://www.econointl.com/sw/). However, be forewarned, you get what you
>pay for. (It works fine, but is minimal at best). Also, unlike JAWs (which
>interacts with all Windows applications) it is nothing more than a "talking"
>browser.
I know about Web 2000 but nobody uses Web 2000 so its idiosyncrasies are irrelevant.
Many people use JAWS so its idiosyncrasies need to be catered for. Web-site developers need to know what works and what doesn't. The WAI resources simply aren't adequate to the task. The discussions last year about adjacent links are a case in point.
This isn't only about JAWS, of course. What goes for Freedom Scientific also goes for IBM and the makers of Window Eyes. I wasn't intending to single JAWS out.
>The point is, if you feel you need to hear your site to ensure you've not
>missed anything, fair enough.
Precisely. Further, in taking the time and trouble to do this, I am helping to enhance the usefulness of JAWS (admittedly only in a tiny corner of the web). I don't believe I should have to pay for the privilege. I am doing that bit of the work, not Freedom Scientific. Why should I have to pay them for the privilege of helping them make JAWS as useful as possible to their customers?
If Freedom Scientific want to interact only with customers, they will have to pay the price. The inevitable result will be fewer JAWS-friendly web-sites. It's not about free lunches, it's about give-and-take. It's the users of JAWS that lose out most. (In the long run, believe it will also have an adverse effect on Freedom Scientific's profitability, but I could be wrong about that).
>But to somehow feel that you are being
>short-changed or put upon by software companies who require that they
>actually be paid for their software is plain ridiculous
I dare say it would be if I did so feel.
>- do you work for free?
A lot of my time, yes. My whole web-site is free. So is the advice I give to people who write to me from all over the world, much too far away ever to become my clients.
>You can be commended for caring enough to look into accessible
>development, whether as a full time occupation or simply a hobby, but there
>is no such thing as a free lunch! Like anything in life, if you wish to
>succeed there is a required investment; be it time, money, effort, or all
>three. The up side of all of this is that should you become accomplished in
>this field, you will be one of a very few, making your services all that
>more valuable...
You mistake me, I have no intention of selling my (very amateur) web skills. I was saying that a lot of the more thoughtful content on the web (including mine) is freely offered by people expert in their own fields. It is offered for free and at a considerable personal expense. Maybe I did not make myself clear enough.
--
Philip Pawley
Liverpool, UK
http://www.alexanderworks.org.uk/
--
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
From: John Foliot - bytown internet
Date: Thu, Feb 20 2003 6:08AM
Subject: The value of knowledge (was: repetitive navigation)
← Previous message | Next message →
> Precisely. Further, in taking the time and trouble to do this, I
> am helping to enhance the usefulness of JAWS (admittedly only in
> a tiny corner of the web). I don't believe I should have to pay
> for the privilege. I am doing that bit of the work, not Freedom
> Scientific. Why should I have to pay them for the privilege of
> helping them make JAWS as useful as possible to their customers?
>
> If Freedom Scientific want to interact only with customers, they
> will have to pay the price. The inevitable result will be fewer
> JAWS-friendly web-sites. It's not about free lunches, it's about
> give-and-take. It's the users of JAWS that lose out most. (In the
> long run, believe it will also have an adverse effect on Freedom
> Scientific's profitability, but I could be wrong about that).
>
I'm not sure exactly what a JAWs Friendly web site is... I know what a user
friendly web site is, what a valid standards based web site is, and what a
Universally Accessible web site is, but I did not know that we should be
making JAWs specific web sites...
There a numerous talented software developers out there who have wonderful
ideas about how to make Windows a better product; not all of them work for
MicroSoft. I guess however that because they have these ideas and perhaps
even send them in to Mr. Gates they too should be entitled to free copies of
the Windows OS.
I'm sorry, I do not buy into your argument - frankly I do not think Freedom
Scientific knows or cares who you are, and will probably not listen to you
anyway. Whether or not that is a sound business model is between them and
their shareholders, but arguing that your unlimited free usage of their
product somehow contributes to the betterment of their product is fanciful
wimsy at best. (Sounds to me like a lot more taking than giving...)
Let's be very clear here. JAWs interacts with the user's computer system.
It is written to work with Windows as it takes advantage of numerous
Accessibilty features native to Windows. Using JAWS, you can run Internet
Explorer, Netscape/Mozilla, Opera, LYNX, and any other browser you choose,
although your milage may vary. (Window Eyes works in a similar way). IBM's
HomePageReader on the other hand is a web specific product. While not
exactly the same as JAWs it too is a popular tool used by the visually
disabled. A fully licensed copy of this tool is $150.00 USD
(http://www-3.ibm.com/able/hpr2.html#order_info), not that different than
purchasing Dreamweaver or HomeSite or FrontPage or any other software
application you might be using. For what it's worth, this is what I use in
my testing lab. I have also associated myself with someone who *does* use
JAWs daily, so that should I have any specific concerns I can ask him to do
a quick check on a specific item. (By experience, there are a number of list
members here who freely offer a similar feedback. They may not review 150
HTML documents, but generally are more than happy to look at one or two)
Being Canadian I will use hockey as an analogy, although there are numerous
others that could apply. To play hockey, all one really needs is a pair of
skates ($50 -$200), a stick ($25.00 +/-) a puck ($5.00) and ice (Free). We
call it shinny and it can be a wholesome, fun, and an envigorating
experience. If you want to take the sport further, you will need more
equipement however - helmet, padding, pants, sweater, equipement bag,
whatever. Even Amateur hockey enthusiasts who may play one evening a week
in an Industrial League or what have you can spend many hundreds of dollars
on their entertainment/sport. It's a choice they make.
So Philip, with all due respect, do not sit there and attempt to convince me
that because you are interested in this topic, no mater what level of
seriousness it may entail, that you should be entitled to free software. If
you want to play the game, step up to the plate...
>
> You mistake me, I have no intention of selling my (very amateur)
> web skills. I was saying that a lot of the more thoughtful
> content on the web (including mine) is freely offered by people
> expert in their own fields. It is offered for free and at a
> considerable personal expense. Maybe I did not make myself clear enough.
>
The advice you give freely is by choice. Opinions are everywhere and often
are of varying quality (as you might be thinking as you read *my* post). I
too offer free advise and "consulting", although I also charge for my
services whenever I can - this is how I feed my family. But by offering a
little bit (or even sometimes a lot) of "free" advice, I can also build up
my cache of expertise, thus making my consulting skills worth more in the
long run. That's my give and take. The owner of this list (Paul) I suspect
also believes in this business model; he did not charge you to join this
list, nor does he charge for the numerous usefull articles on his web site.
But along the way I'm sure that the altruistic goals of webAIM.org has also
turned into a viable way for him to make a living. (and that is not a Flame
against WebAIM, on the contrary I salute Paul for his contributions) But
for me to expect every member of this list to do exactly the same is as
unrealistic as expecting everybody to work for free. If you choose to do
so, that's great (I do volunteer work too), but do not expect everyone to
feel the same way; including Freedom Scientific and IBM.
Respectfully
JF
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
From: Carol Foster
Date: Thu, Feb 20 2003 6:58AM
Subject: Re: On JAWS demo. Was RE: repetitive navigation
← Previous message | No next message
It sounds like you hit the year limit on the free JAWS. We started out
with that a while back.
We have been using ConnectOutloud to do some testing and demonstrations
for about a year or so now, not hugely extensively, but it seems to be
like JAWS for the most part for the Web. Not free of course, but a
fraction of the price of JAWS. ($250, if I remember right, for 1.0;
then upgrade to 2.0 was free.) The one place where I am aware that the
functionality has diverged from JAWS is that ConnectOutloud does not
handle the new Flash MX accessibility features that the latest version
of JAWS is supposed to handle.
Carol
Philip Pawley wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> You wrote:
>
>> Rant away, but best that that rant be based on fact.
>
>
> Quite.
>
>
>> Freedom Scientific's
>> policy of timed demonstration is, in my opinion, extremely generous.
>> Full
>> function JAWS runs for 40 minutes and then you have to reboot your
>> computer.
>> For someone who is not blind and wants to test with a screen reader,
>> it is
>> hard to imagine a better deal.
>
>
> That's what I thought when mine was working like that. Nonetheless,
> when I tried to run JAWS again a few weeks (maybe months) later it
> gave me an expiration message. I got the self-same message when I
> tried to re-install it now on receiving your post.
>
> The message reads:-
>
> "This demo of JAWS has expired. Call your local access technology
> dealer or contact Freedom Scientific at 727-803-8000 or
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = to purchase your fully-licensed
> version of JAWS."
>
>
> I can send you a screen-shot if you like.
>
>
>> I don't know what problems you had, but it
>> sounds like user error to me.
>
>
> User error? Me? Never! :-)
>
> Seriously, I'd be delighted if it turns out to be so.
>
> All the best,
> Philip Pawley
--
Carol Foster, Web Developer
Internet Publishing Group, Information Technology Services
University of Massachusetts, President's