Re: accessibility calls, but some questions from the mods of the forum in which they are being made

  • From: Chris Hofstader <cdh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 05:38:41 -0400

Purely as conjecture, I'd wager that common controls would have fewer security 
problems as they would have had tons more testing than anything custom. I think 
most of the virus protection companies code to some sort of visual aesthetic 
and aren't thinking about accessibility at all.

It isn't hard to make entirely custom controls follow standard accessibility 
guidelines and work well with screen readers but, no matter how many complaints 
they get, they still ignore us. When I last used Windows regularly, I used 
NOD32 and it was very accessible.

cdh




On Aug 28, 2010, at 10:23 PM, Katherine moss wrote:

> Hey folks,
> I am currently discussing the topic of accessibility with the moderators of 
> the Bleeping Computer forum.  I made the coment that I don’t find 
> MalwareBites anti-Malware as accessible as it could be and suggesting that 
> they talk to the developers about it and ask them to possibly think about 
> making the controls more standardized.  One particular mod had the question 
> of whether using standard windows controls versus custom ones would cause the 
> staff at MBAM to have to do extra work to protect the program from malware.  
> Does using windows controls equal a malware attack vector?  I’m currently 
> learning to program in C#, and the book I’m reading says nothing about that.  
> Some input, explanation?  Many thanks,
>  
> Katherine
> 
> 
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
> database 5405 (20100828) __________
> 
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> 
> http://www.eset.com

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. programmingblind
  3. Archive
  4. 08-2010