RE: .Net Framework Documentation
- From: "Ken Perry" <whistler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2010 12:08:27 -0400
We agree, but I lay it at the tool kits feet the designer will do nothing
they are not forced to do.
Ken
-----Original Message-----
From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of RicksPlace
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 11:57 AM
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: .Net Framework Documentation
Hi Guys: I think allot of the problem is with the Web Designers not applying
accessibility design up front. When they finally get a request to make their
sites accessible they are well beyond being able to do that in any cost
effective manner. The whole way accessibility is handled is the problem in
my opinion. We have the Major Development Software Providers making their
Development Software to facillitate accessibility in one manner or another.
Then the Independent Web Developers either make use of them, if they have a
reason to do so, or not if they don't feel a compelling need to do so. At
that point we have the Independent Screen Reader companies trying to build
code to access the Web using IA1, IA2, MSAA or UIA or whatever else is out
there. They not only have to do it for a Screen reader but for braille and
magnification devices and now mobile devices. They have to continue to
support legacy code for the old style accessibility, the diferent versiions
of everything and add new code to work with the new versions of everything
without breaking the older versions and have their apps know which version
of what to use when, not a easy thing to do for small under capitalized very
low margin companies. So, we get all kinds of new standards every year or
so, it takes the Web Masters a year to implement them, if they even ever
implement them and the Screen Reader companies another year to implement the
changes they get complaints about from their users. By the time the changes
flow through the entire chain the "new" standards, some, or many, of them
are obsolete and slated for obsolescence. Also, the screen reader companies
all handle their products in diferent ways so that it is most dificult to
get any agreement among the blind community on how the Development Software
vendors and Web Masters need to implement apps to make them work with the
accessibility software.. There is no firm hand at the wheel and standards
and implementation just flounder around controlled by individual interests
of the various companies involved while the users, us, have to live with the
results of their personal infighting. So, that's my thoughts on the subject.
Nothing will get any better until, and unless, there are more uniform and
enforcable standards put in place and in today's economic and political
situation that is about as likely as blind folks taking control of the
government and the Supreme Court. Outside of that we are just tinkering
around the edges of the problem, trying to stay afloat in this visual
orientated world. If not for the pressures on some government and corporate
entities by various groups and individuals we would have nothing. Oh well it
is what it is so I'll make do with WindowEyes, my ScreenReader of choice,
for now.
Rick USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave" <davidct1209@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: .Net Framework Documentation
> Hi Rick, I'll just interject here if you don't mind. The issue again
> is that the web as it stands has a very poor keyboard model; the part
> of accessibility that often gets forgotten is that not only do we need
> a DOM that exposes all information about a page programmatically for
> screen readers to consume, but we need a consistent way of managing
> focus at the framework level. This would include supporting
> selection, containers (and bounded focus), linear navigation, text
> traversal, etc. It's not clear what this would look like since the
> web is sort of a weird mix between application and document, so there
> are times when you want to feel like you are moving around a caret
> while other times you want to "tab" from control to control; some of
> these controls should be containers such as tables in which you can
> arrow up/down. This simply hasn't gotten much attention since the
> majority of users use a pointing device (mouse, trackpad, touch,
> etc.).
>
> Think of the Windows paradigm; you as a screen reader user basically
> play within a sandbox of windows; within each window, you can tab
> around and you have common UI elements. This vocabulary is well
> defined and consistent. However, on the web, there isn't this type of
> order. AxsJAX imposes this type of order. VoiceOver tries to group
> DOM elements based on visual layout or DOM hierarchy relationships.
> However, neither fits to any standard agreed upon by W3C. Thus, the
> screen reader venders hack up their own proprietary solutions and
> refuse to change when the web evolves (besides making incremental
> feature updates to try and workaround new web technologies).
> Microsoft / others basically then have no recourse to fix anything
> since any fix would involve breaking existing solutions (look at the
> very slow adoption of UI Automation). I mean, Jaws is still using
> win32 to get lots of its on-screen information when they could very
> well switch much of their hooks to MSAA.
>
>
>
>
> On 8/8/10, RicksPlace <ofbgmail@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi Ken: Is it an inherrant problem with the Web Accessibility hooks or is
>> it
>> a problem with the Web Designers who layout Web Pages? I know from
>> developing a couple of pages in VWD that I can make a page accessible
>> with
>> some extra work and by not using some canned cUI controls but I don't
>> think
>> most sighted designers, especially overseas, worry about that too much.
>> Even
>> the thousands of programmers at Google worry about accessibility after
>> the
>> fact when they put up a new application and that makes adding
>> accessibility
>> dificult and sometimes impossible without crazy modifications. For
>> example,
>> if the list of links in a mail program were inside a DropDown list you
>> could
>> have the ability to select a group, or all, the links using the cursor or
>> the mouse and then hit a button or hot key to delete, copy or otherwise
>> work
>> with the selected group. That would be as fast as anything I can think of
>> for that feature. I haven't done much with dynamic links and data but I
>> should think that once they are in the dom they should be available for
>> that
>> type of "desktop" actionability. I am waiting until the guys at GW Micro
>> come out with their COM interface to see how they handle things. My
>> biggest
>> concern is exactly what you have described. Limited accessibility ten
>> times
>> slower than sighted access is still accessibility achieved legally I
>> guess.
>> I am not so sure about not having Government / Industry based standards
>> enforcable by law and eliminating the accessibility foundation diferences
>> between major players like IBM and Microsoft when it comes to the
>> technical
>> hooks. One standard instead of IAccessible2 and, or, UIA and or other
>> versions of Web Accessibility hooking models. As it now stands a screen
>> reader has to handle the very complex interfaces for web apps and desktop
>> apps, differing Operating System requirements, Diferent methods of
>> dexposing
>> Accessibility information and all the variants of Website Accessibility
>> including JavaScript, CSS and Dynamic Html, AVI and Animation and all
>> that
>> jazz.
>> IBM won't agree with Microsoft who won't agree with Google and so on. So
>> we
>> get Research Project after Research Project to describe the best
>> Accessibility methodology and the Accessibility community applaud when
>> each
>> new white paper is released but nothing, or comparitivly little ever gets
>> done. Where is the common accessibility standards between a Linux, IBM,
>> based app and a UIA - Microsoft app? What about diferent browsers and
>> diferent versions of each browser and related JS, CSS and other new
>> technicals? It is still the Wild West out there when it comes to
>> accessibility and the Screen Reader companies arefloundering to figure
>> out
>> how to handle all the crazyness that is International Corporate Egos when
>> it
>> comes to Accessibility Practices me thinks.
>> Rick USA
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Ken Perry" <whistler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2010 10:20 PM
>> Subject: RE: .Net Framework Documentation
>>
>>
>>>I am speaking only of the interface. Not the languages the web is
>>>written
>>> in. When it comes right down to it we do not interface with php, pearl,
>>> asp. We interface with html weather it is served by Javascript or just
>>> a
>>> clean page of html. The html is what needs to have a blind friendly UI
>>> stuck on the front. That can mean ear cons like system access has or
>>> voice
>>> schema's like jaws but those seem to be more candy than actual helpful
>>> information.
>>>
>>> You say Firefox and Internet Explorer are very accessible I say go to
>>> www.gmail.com a very accessible site and delete 246 emails. It took me
>>> forever. My wife had over 1000 and was finished in less than 5 minutes.
>>> I don't even know how long it took her because she was done before I
>>> could
>>> time her. If I am in outlook and want to delete all the mails from
>>> one
>>> email list I do a quick search and ctrl-a and delete they are gone. .
>>> Try
>>> that on a web interface. For the sighted user many of these web
>>> interfaces
>>> look exactly like a regular application. To us they look like nasty web
>>> rather than easy to use dialogs. Another example of what I am talking
>>> about
>>> is the Google Rss reader or Google docs. My sited friends that code
>>> with
>>> me
>>> at work all use Google Rss now because it's an easy way for them to read
>>> their news at work home or on the go with their Cell phone. To them
>>> using
>>> Google Rss is as easy as me using the rss groups I have set up in
>>> Outlook
>>> or
>>> other applications designed for rss because they can act on the groups
>>> with
>>> drags of their mouse right on the web as if it was a true list try that
>>> with a screen reader. Same for Google docs. Sure you can use it but I
>>> challenge you to go make a document on google docs set up a table put
>>> some
>>> items in the table and then put headers before and after the table. See
>>> how
>>> long that takes you even if you can get it done over how long it would
>>> take
>>> you in something like word.
>>>
>>> What I am saying in short is the web right now might be accessible but
>>> it
>>> sure is a bitch to use in many cases.
>>>
>>> Ken
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Katherine
>>> Moss
>>> Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2010 8:14 PM
>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: RE: .Net Framework Documentation
>>>
>>> I mean firefox and internet explorer are both very accessible. What do
>>> you
>>> mean that we need to find out a whole new way to work the web for the
>>> blind.
>>> You mean to drop the technology that we've been used to for years? Do
>>> you
>>> mean no more PHP, no more Perl, no more ASP.net?
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ken Perry
>>> Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2010 1:44 PM
>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: RE: .Net Framework Documentation
>>>
>>> I will second some of what people are saying here. MSDN is very nice
>>> online. The problem is to this day no screen reader has made the web as
>>> easy to use for the blind as it is for the sited. A new way to deal
>>> with
>>> the web has to be designed and I am not even sure what that new way is
>>> but
>>>
>>> I
>>> think that is where we have to be putting all our power. Making the web
>>> as
>>> accessible as regular programs because that is where regular programs
>>> are
>>> going. We should be able to use Google docs as simply as opening Word
>>> same
>>> for gmail my wife doesn't even use a mail client any longer because the
>>> web
>>> clients are getting so good. You sure the hell couldn't prove that to
>>> me
>>> but I don't blame the web apps as much as I do all the screen readers
>>> and
>>> I
>>> mean all. If people have ideas on how to make a better web browser
>>> interface for the blind please write me and tell me I have several
>>> projects
>>> I am working on that this information would come in handy.
>>>
>>> Ken
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Katherine
>>> Moss
>>> Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2010 1:09 PM
>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: RE: .Net Framework Documentation
>>>
>>> MSDN's a beautiful thing, so why don't they make it beautiful for all
>>> who
>>> want to use it?
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dave
>>> Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2010 11:26 AM
>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: Re: .Net Framework Documentation
>>>
>>> When I was doing more .Net related work with C#, I typically fired up
>>> a browser and kept it at msdn.com. I pretty much had entered class
>>> names, then did a linear search (via a text find command) for members
>>> (fields, properties, methods, parent/sub classes, etc).
>>>
>>> It would have been nice to get this directly from the IDE, but it's
>>> just one extra step. VS uses an embeded IE web view, it works, but
>>> Jaws has some issues switching in and out of virtual buffering.
>>>
>>> On 8/7/10, RicksPlace <ofbgmail@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Hi: I tend to use the Online MSDN Class Library documentation. Once
>>>> you
>>>> learn to navigate Google to find the ones you want they are pretty
>>> helpful.
>>>> They are mostely reference materials, not tutorials, but they do
>>>> contain
>>>> examples. They do give the necessary information on a class methods and
>>>> procedures with the available parameters, events and enumerations with
>>> some
>>>> examples.
>>>> The examples do tend to be overly complex at times but if you know what
>>>> a
>>>> class is you can read what each class does, what it's methods and
>>> Properties
>>>> do and see an example or 2 of how to use them. To find a tutorial on
>>>> using
>>> a
>>>> particular method or property that I don't understand I find keywords
>>>> to
>>>> Google from the MSDN Document Examples or Reference and Google for
>>>> third
>>>> party articles on that method or property as used in a similar example
>>>> to
>>>> the one I am thinking of creating. . I don't like the IDE's built in
>>>> help
>>>> feature much at all. Another way to get at relevant methods is to use
>>>> Intellisense. But, of course, that method does not give you any
>>>> examples
>>> or
>>>> explanations of what selected methods or properties do.
>>>> You can add the Programmer's user Guide and Reference Manual pages as
>>>> hyperlink Icons to your desk top for your particular version of VS and
>>> then
>>>> get to topics of interest from those main pages as well. It's like
>>>> having
>>>> those 2 online books on your desktop. You can do the same for other
>>>> MSDN
>>>> pages if you want as well or you can just save them in your favorites
>>> folder
>>>> or even in a text file in a folder to create your own book of reference
>>>> materials and Programmers Guide Materials which are more a learning
>>>> tool
>>>> than the Reference Manual. .
>>>> Again, verify the version of the online MSDN Library docs you use.
>>>> There
>>>> are usually multiple versions available such as for vs 2005, 2008 and
>>>> now
>>>> 2010. I think once you have a main Library url for a class or a manual
>>>> the
>>>> embedded links to technicals will relate to other pages for that same
>>>> version of VS so you only need to save the highest level page like the
>>>> Programmer Reference or the Programmer Guide for your version and go
>>>> from
>>>> there or the Library Heading Page..
>>>> I have not found the MSDN Tutorials particularly helpful but I use
>>>> their
>>>> docs for reference and to learn new features since I already know most
>>>> of
>>>> what is provided, the classes and methods typical properties and events
>>> for
>>>> the VS features I use.
>>>> Anyway, that is how I use the MSDN Online Docs for vb.net 2008 and
>>>> it's
>>>> related features and VWD 2008 etc...
>>>> Rick USA
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: Kerneels Roos
>>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2010 5:23 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: .Net Framework Documentation
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> I was just wondering how other people experienced working with the
>>>> Microsoft document explorer, and if people had some tips and tricks
>>>> they
>>>> were using to make browsing the docs more economic and a more
>>>> productive
>>>> process. What I'm saying is I -- for one -- was not blaming MS at all
>>>> or
>>>> complaining about it, just looking for advice :-).
>>>>
>>>> It's really getting old this thing that blind people complain about
>>>> how
>>>> inaccesseble this or that piece of software is, as if we have this
>>>> special
>>>> right to things being super easy for us. Well, we don't and it's a
>>> privilege
>>>> rather than a right if companies go to the expense of trying to make
>>>> their
>>>> stuf more accessible. They have little or next to nothing to gain from
>>>> spending money on accessibility, yet they still do it, and try to do it
>>> well
>>>> even.
>>>>
>>>> If you look at the "Help on Help" section in the MS document explorer
>>> for
>>>> example, you'll see that there are many accessibility features of that
>>>> program, like configurable keystrokes for example and everythin can be
>>> done
>>>> with a keystroke. This does not necessarily mean that the particular
>>> program
>>>> is easy to use if you can't click everywhere like fully sighted people
>>> does,
>>>> but it does mean that MS tried to make it workable if you can't see the
>>>> screen properly.
>>>>
>>>> Wouldn't it be great if the blind programmer community could get
>>>> known
>>> for
>>>> being super cooperative with companies in their drive to make their
>>> software
>>>> accessible by being nice, giving constructive critisism and each member
>>>> of
>>>> the community going the extra mile themselves before opening their
>>>> mounths
>>>> to complain? Wouldn't such a character prompt vendors to try harder and
>>>> harder to make their products inclusive?
>>>>
>>>> And if company X produce very inaccessible software and efforts to
>>>> make
>>>> them try a bit fails it should be seen as an opportunity for company Y
>>>> to
>>>> create competing software that are in fact better and more accessible--
>>>> company Y could add value.
>>>>
>>>> I'm really impressed with many folks on this list that generously
>>>> offer
>>>> their opinions and advice for free to even the silly questions. Let's
>>>> all
>>>> try ask smarter questions and do our homework first. And if one happen
>>>> to
>>>> ask a silly question, be ready to accept a silly response, and let's
>>>> not
>>>> moan and complain -- life's too short.
>>>>
>>>> OK, enough complaining about complaining!
>>>>
>>>> Enjoy the adventure of programming!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Katherine Moss
>>>> <plymouthroamer285@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'm on 11.0.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
>>>> Littlefield,
>>>> Tyler
>>>> Sent: Friday, August 06, 2010 1:19 PM
>>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Subject: Re: .Net Framework Documentation
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They seem to work fine for me, what jaws are you both running?
>>>> Rather
>>>> than blame microsoft right off, lets look a bit closer to home first.
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>
>>>> From: Katherine Moss
>>>>
>>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>> Sent: Friday, August 06, 2010 11:14 AM
>>>>
>>>> Subject: RE: .Net Framework Documentation
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'll tell you,
>>>>
>>>> I have had the exact same issue with all of the .net rreferences
>>>> stuff. Even the new SDK docs aren't even accessible via document
>>> explorer.
>>>> I don't understand why Microsoft doesn't implement their own classes
>>>> they
>>>> have provided for accessibility in their own software!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kerneels
>>>> Roos
>>>> Sent: Friday, August 06, 2010 3:51 AM
>>>> To: programmingblind
>>>> Subject: .Net Framework Documentation
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi List,
>>>>
>>>> Don't know about you guys, but I don't find the Microsoft .Net
>>>> Framework documentation browser, or the Microsoft Document Explorer
>>>> that
>>>> ships with Visual Studio 2008 very accessible via JAWS. Yes, one can
>>>> get
>>> at
>>>> the information, but it's not a smooth and simple process like with
>>>> the
>>>> older style CHM files that works great with JAWS.
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone know if all of that documentation, or at least just
>>>> the
>>>> .Net Class Library reference is available in the old style CHM format?
>>> I've
>>>> searched a bit but could not get a conclusive, authoritive download as
>>>> of
>>>> yet.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe I'm missing something, but the current means by which I
>>>> manage
>>>> to navigate it is not eficient at all. Much tabbing, moving around with
>>> the
>>>> JAWS cursor and so on...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If anyone is using the default help system any tips would be most
>>>> welcome!
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Kerneels Roos
>>>> Cell/SMS: +27 (0)82 309 1998
>>>> Skype: cornelis.roos
>>>>
>>>> The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the
>>> cheese!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
>>>> virus
>>>> signature database 5345 (20100805) __________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.eset.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
>>>> virus
>>>> signature database 5345 (20100805) __________
>>>>
>>>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.eset.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>>>> signature database 5347 (20100806) __________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.eset.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>>>> signature database 5347 (20100806) __________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.eset.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Kerneels Roos
>>>> Cell/SMS: +27 (0)82 309 1998
>>>> Skype: cornelis.roos
>>>>
>>>> The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the
>>>> cheese!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> __________
>>> View the list's information and change your settings at
>>> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>>>
>>>
>>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>>> signature
>>> database 5348 (20100806) __________
>>>
>>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>>
>>> http://www.eset.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>>> signature
>>> database 5348 (20100806) __________
>>>
>>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>>
>>> http://www.eset.com
>>>
>>>
>>> __________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>>> signature
>>> database 5348 (20100806) __________
>>>
>>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>>
>>> http://www.eset.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>>> signature
>>> database 5348 (20100806) __________
>>>
>>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>>
>>> http://www.eset.com
>>>
>>>
>>> __________
>>> 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
>
__________
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
Other related posts:
