Vicug-l Readers:
While I have a general policy of forwarding what I think is helpful
information to more than one list, it is also my general practice to
restrict subsequent comments to the list where such discussion appears.
However, I take strong exception to the comments forwarded to this list
that I'm a JFW evangelist. It is my professional and personal policy to
teach a variety of access products and to recognize that people choose
software for many different reasons. The following was originally sent to
the list where the information forwarded to this list originally appeared.
>Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 09:29:08 -0800
>To: [log in to unmask] (Multiple recipients of NFBnet NFB-Talk Mailing List)
>From: Kelly Ford <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: RE: Article: Blind surfing
>In-Reply-To: <81F431C3C95ED1119D7000805F5AC0C1225EC2@WTN-NT>
>
>Jonathan,
>
>I take strong exception and personal afront to your characterization of
myself as a "JFW evangelist". In point of fact I routinely teach people to
browse the internet using Window Eyes as well as other screen reading
packages. The web sites I mention on my Webwatch list (see
http://www.teleport.com/~kford/webwatch.htm ) are all tested with JFW,
Window Eyes and the necessary versions of Internet Explorer as well as
Lynx, and at least one DOS screen reader. When time permits, roughly 50
percent of the time, I also test the web sites with at least one
demonstration version of WinVision or Window Bridge. As of late I've also
incorporated testing with a demonstration version of HAL. Personally I
don't care what screen reading package people choose because I've found
that that choice is made for a variety of reasons. Most people I know want
to do more than just browse the web with their computer and access
technology. My philosophy is to teach people the best strategies for the
equipment they have, whatever access system they've chosen, be that Window
Eyes, JFW, speech or braille or some combination there of.
>
>I will say that JFW is my personal screen reader of choice because I'm
relatively comfortable with the company's scripting language and work I do
outside the blindness field requires me to use numerous computer
applications that need extensive screen reader customization to have a
chance at speaking. My experience has shown me that every Windows screen
reading package has strengths and weaknesses when it comes to browsing the
web, however. That said I've not found a package out there that can
compensate for badly designed web sites that fail to use such helps to
people who are blind as alt-tags and client side image maps to mention just
a few.
>
>JFW with Internet 3.02 is about the absolute last thing I'd personally
suggest someone use to browse the internet. JFW 3.2 with IE 4.01 is a
large improvement in that company's internet access but in my opinion aside
from actually allowing one to use IE 4.01 it does little that's
revolutionary. The page reformat and link list features are little more
than fancy parlor tricks and in my opinion the company still fails to
really understand what's needed in web access by people who are blind. I
am no fan of the company's puffery that claims that much of what HJ has
done is this incredible feat of technological marvel.
>
>I haven't found a screen reader on the market that can tap into the newer
web technologies effectively. Try plaing some of the trivia games at
http://www.ntn.com where you must click on screen locations that are
invisible to all the screen readers I've tried. This is in addition to
having to read a question, five answers and three clues in about 20 seconds.
>
>The point isn't that I think people who are blind need to sit around and
play trivia games all day. Rather I think this kind of web site is an
example of the transactions and interactions that are going to be
commonplace as the internet moves to an ever-increasing place of work,
business and recreation.
>
>With respect to whether regulation of the internet is necessary for
accessibility or not, all I can say is that I've tried and continue to try,
the personal approach and it has some benefits. However, I'm not convinced
that it is going to solve things in the end.
>
>I do not think myself an evangelist for JFW or Henter-Joyce. In reality I
think the company is unresponsive to users, has a technical support staff
that by and large gives inaccurate and uninformed information and in
general I think the company inflates claims and successes in the access
tech arena. I personally use the software because, as I said, it meets
some needs I *must* have met outside the blindness area and because the
userbase of the software is quite large and generally creative.
>
>Kelly
List Archives http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html
Index of Vicugs http://trfn.clpgh.org/vipace/vicug/vicugs.html
Subscription Form http://trfn.clpgh.org/vipace/vicug/subscribe.html
Mail Contact [log in to unmask]
|