Could you perhaps offer any authority for your predictions?
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I for one would be overjoyed if the requirements you cite were
enshrined in law and the average blind person didn't need the
equivalent knowledge of an IT specialist to order a can of beans
On 02/01/2018, Pranav Lal <email@example.com> wrote:
<snip > This is one area where I disagree. Not that jaws has the features
that they are useful, but that they belong in NVDA. I believe that itPL] Eric, I agree with Sandra. Philosophy is ok in the long run but I have
is the responsibility of developers to label their graphics and
controls, draw and class their windows and controls properly, and
build keyboard/touchscreen support for their apps properly. This is
increasingly required by law, imposed by societal change, taught as
programming best practice, and demonstrably beneficial beyond the
needs of disability communities. Unfortunately, it's not all there
yet, but within the next three years, it will become legally and
socially inacceptable to build software without regard for
accessibility standards, just as you wouldn't build out with no regard
for UI, performance, security, and other common standards and best
practices. I believe the development philosophy of NVDA is based on
this. A screen reader should read the screen, conveying the
information already provided in accessible format, doing as little
interpretation as possible.
to get work done now and will take the easiest path to do that work.
Compliance is never 100%. What about all the legacy applications enterprises
run? I need a solution for reading the screen and I see no problem in that
solution giving me information in a way that is easiest for me to consume.