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