Re: Google
- From: "Adrian Spratt" <A.Spratt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 00:53:55 -0400
Hi there, Yardbird.
Your reservations about the extent to which google appears to be aiming for
accessibility all make sense. It would be ironic if we, as blind Web
surfers, found ourselves arguing against excessive accessibility, but I
agree that we should take care that standards aren't needlessly stringent.
JAWS takes me easily around the photographs and columns of newspapers and
other publications. That needs to be recognized, as you suggest.
I hesitate to incur the wrath of the moderator of this invaluable list, but
a quick word on your copyright comment. I came across the Reuters article on
a Schwab website for which one must be a client to subscribe. The webpage
contains some nasty warnings. Aside from that, I believe in honoring
copyright. I assume that Reuters and, in this case, Schwab profit from hits
on that article. I wish similar success for your published work, which
deserves both recognition and compensation.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yardbird" <yardbird@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2006 12:04 AM
Subject: Re: Google
Hello Adrian,
Curious to see the Reuter's piece, I went to the Beta accessible Google
search engine whose link has been sent around today on several of my mailing
lists, and input the exact headline in the edit box, first without quotes
and then with. Either way, the Reuters article didn't come up on the first
page.
However, when I went to the regular Google search function and entered the
same search terms, the Reuters link came up immediately after a couple of
sponsored links on the first results page.
Interesting. Or ironic. Perhaps the search engine determined that the
Reuters site isn't up to W3C accessibility standards? I read the FAQ page on
the Beta search engine site, and some of the criteria used seemed a bit off,
to me, unless the wording wasn't as accurate as it might have been. Sites
with photos or graphics, especially. Every day, I navigate article pages
from the Times to Slate, completely unbothered and unimpeded by the photos
that download to the pages. And if I'm feeling like cruising an extremely
clean and simplified version of such a page, I click on the Print link and
get such a page, of nothing but text. I wonder, fittingly, how rational and
realistic some of Google's other criteria for accessibility are.
Anyway,thanks for the heads up about the Reuters piece. Do you really think
they'd sic their legal department on someone copying and pasting one of
their articles, which I assume are offered free of charge, into a group
email? I kind of doubt it. but I'm not a lawyer, and I don't even play one
on TV. More seriously, there are stories and articles of mine floating
around all sorts of blind-related Web sites and some others, pieces
originally published in the Los Angeles Times, and with that paper retaining
the copyright, as is done these days. A mere Google search on their part
could turn up these "reprints" anytime they wanted to find them, but, well,
I haven't yet received a warning call from my editor or the Tribune Corp.
legal staff in Chicago. Go figure.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adrian Spratt" <A.Spratt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <jawslite@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2006 8:06 PM
Subject: Google
Hi everyone.
Tonight Reuters has published a report on Google's initiative to make its
website more accessible. I don't want to run afoul of Reuters' copyright, so
here's the article's title and author in case anyone is interested enough to
search for it. One place you're likely to find it is at Yahoo Finance. Go to
the page on Google's stock information. Google's stock symbol is GOOG. I'm
sorry to be this obtuse, but I hope I've given enough to make finding it,
whether through Yahoo or google's own website, relatively simple.
Google tests more accessible Web search for blind By Eric Auchard
--
JFW related links:
JFW homepage: http://www.freedomscientific.com/
Scripting mailing list:
http://lists.the-jdh.com/listinfo.cgi/scriptography-the-jdh.com
JFW List instructions:
To post a message to the list, send it to jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message to
jfw-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.
Archives located at: //www.freelists.org/archives/jfw
If you have any concerns about the list, post received from the list, or the way the list is being run, do not post them to the list. Rather contact the list owner at jfw-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Other related posts:
