RE: GNU Accessibility Statement Online

Third party pdf creators don't necessarily follow the Adobe standard.
That's why sometimes when opening a third party produced pdf file with
adobe it doesn't open.  Unprotected has one meaning in adobe and is
configured differently inside third party produced pdf files.  People
over on blind-l found that out and it's something the federal government
is dealing with because snagit32 is installed and being used by some
managers for pdf file production.  I have read that nvda using google
chrome exposes flash better than jaws does to the point where the flash
content is readable.
Now, let's see which screen reader gets vba buttons accessible in excel
first, then the question is how many others will be able to follow.
 


Rot47: <;F56]52D9:6==@?2GJ]>:=>
-----Original Message-----
From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ken Perry
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 12:49
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: GNU Accessibility Statement Online

This line is a flat out lie.

Silverlight is similar. PDF is also difficult; though there is free
software
to view it, it does not support free access technology software. GNU PDF
aims to do better.

I was in the Adobe open forum at CSUN and I have it recorded.  They use
NVDA
to do all their testing now and it supports PDF better if not as well as
JAWS  in.  According to the Adobe Accessibility crew which were at the
forum
this is what they are shooting for is a free accessible solutions that
Jaws
can follow or gw or who ever.  Furthermore the statement about Flash is
not
as true as it used to be and according to the Adobe guys its only
getting
better.

Ken



-----Original Message-----
From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sina Bahram
Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 11:03 AM
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: GNU Accessibility Statement Online

The following statement really got to me:

"and please don't invite users to do something on a server that they
could
conceivably do on their own computers."
 
I understand that Stallmann is one of the leading activists against
cloud
computing, but why on earth are you allowing such an
agenda to creap into a statement on accessibility?

In my opinion, this one statement completely undermines the rest of the
things you're trying to do.

Take care,
Sina

-----Original Message-----
From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chris
Hofstader
Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2010 9:00 AM
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: GNU Accessibility Statement Online

Hi,

For a couple of months, Richard Stallman and I have been working on the
GNU
Accessibility Statement (GAS)  which takes a no nonsense
approach to endorsing the rights of people with disabilities as regard
software within the context of free software. I've never read
a more strongly worded statement from any organization regarding
software
and people with disabilities.

GAS also takes a strong stance on free software values but does not
endorse
any specific license, although we would like people to
use GPL.

You can read the statement at:
http://www.gnu.org/accessibility/accessibility.html
and send comments to me that we can consider for future revisions of the
statement.

Thanks,
cdh

 __________
View the list's information and change your settings at
http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind

__________
View the list's information and change your settings at 
http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind


__________
View the list's information and change your settings at 
http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind

__________
View the list's information and change your settings at
http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind

Other related posts: