Hi Sarah,
Would be happy to answer this question for you now, and if you want
clarification, please write me privately.
>>>>> "Sherman," == Sherman, Sarah <[log in to unmask]> writes:
Sherman,> My colleague Axel Schmetzke and I are pondering screen
Sherman,> reader users' preference of browsers. Could you please
Sherman,> share, in your experience (personal or otherwise), do
Sherman,> you find more people using a screen reader with
Sherman,> text-only browsers, or graphics-based browsers?
I can't really answer that, Sarah except to say that the preference in
training programs all over is to use graphical browsers with the
screen reader of choice. Those of us who have been on the Net for
years, I think will tell you that we prefer a text based browser.
Those who get their equipment through rehab are unfortunately prey
to "forced fennistration". They are given no choice, and the eval
folks do not even consider that some folks might do better with
text based browsers. It's just not done in "the field". the
*only* way a new computer user can escape "forced fennistration"
is if he or she is in contact with the old guard, mostly composed
of computer geeks, who know better. I will say though, that more
and more plain ordinary users are beginning to see the light.
Sherman>If you
Sherman,> use a screen reader, what is your preference?
If you mean which screen reader do I prefer, I prefer Window-eyes when
dealing in graphical matters. I can use Window-Eyes and MSIE
fairly effectively, but need to learn more. It works OK.
Sherman>If you
Sherman,> train others, do you train with the screen reader in
Sherman,> conjunction with a text browser, or a graphics browser?
I don't, but if I did, I'd teach both because there are sites that
work better in Lynx and there are sites that work better in MSIE
the problem, Sarah, is that web sites are *not* consistent and
reliance on one means of access is, frankly, doing the trainee a
disservice. <smile> If you *must* stay in Windows, you can get
Lynx for Windows.
Sherman,> We have found that often, it is much easier to navigate
Sherman,> the WWW with a screen reader when a text-only browser
Sherman,> like Lynx is used. You don't have to worry about
Sherman,> structure as much, and anything that Lynx couldn't
Sherman,> interpret, chances are JAWS (or another screen reader)
Sherman,> wouldn't be able to interpret it anyway. On the other
Sherman,> hand, graphics-based browsers such as Netscape and IE
Sherman,> have structural designs that are harder to navigate with
Sherman,> the screen reader (though if the site is generated with
Sherman,> accessibility in mind, it can be done).
Again, Sarah, you come slap dab up against the real problem, which is
that web sites are not consistent in their formation or their
lay-out or their mark-up languages. there are sites that use
Flash. There are sites that use Java language exclusively. There
are sites that still have no alt-tags and so on. If web design
were standardized, then maybe answering your questions would make
sense. But again, some sites work better in MSIE, some work
better in Lynx or W3, which is my prefered browser.
the problem with rehab has always been that they insist on giving
folks the best equipment to conform to the newest graphical
standards. This may be fine when someone has a job and must use
sophisticated software. However, a student in college needs a
good editor, the ability to access the net, and email. These
things can be had in other OS's than Windows and for much less
cost. Besides, there's a British firm that is working on a screen
reader for X-Windows. If that thing ever flies, It may take the
whole Disability Field by storm.
One other comment which I don't think has been even thought of.
Consider the time factor when dealing with web sites. How much time
does it take to access a given web site with a given browser? Is a
text based browser faster? If it is, it may save a student hours. It
may save an employee days of work. Just an example for you. I spent
fifteen minutes on a web site trying to configure an email list I
belong to. That is too much time spent on that task. Time is money.
that is why I hate email list software that is web based. I can send
L-soft commands via email 25 to 30 times faster than I can access a
Yahoo or Topica web based email malarky. Time is money, please
somebody someplace consider the time factor in your researches and
don't be misled. Graphical browser interpretation takes much longer
than nongraphical use. I'd put time factor as one of your priorities,
frankly!
To sum up, there is no easy answer to your question. I prefer text
based browsers. I find them more efficient. I find that they are
less time consuming than graphical browsers. However, some sites work
better with MSIE, so I'd train students in the use of both kinds of
browsers.
--
Ann K. Parsons
email: [log in to unmask] ICQ Number: 33006854
WEB SITE: http://home.eznet.net/~akp
"All that is gold does not glitter. Not all those who wander are lost." JRRT
|