Please point us at an example of such an article so we can see for ourselves
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
what it seems to contain.
Otherwise we're just guessing, based on your guesses, about what might be
On Sunday 01 April 2018 at 14:31:53, Damien Garwood wrote:
Not sure whether it’s NVDA, or me.
When I attempt to read articles that explain mathematical operations,
explanations of scientific notation being a great example, I generally
experience one or more of the following:
1. Graphics which, I assume would seem to have some sort of formula in it,
but using strange symbols like | and _ where I might expect to see operators
like +, –, * or /. Though I’m not seeing these as often as I used to now.
2. Spaces, sometimes contained in lists, without anything in them, and with
text following it which attempts to explain something which just doesn’t
seem to exist. This seems to have replaced the “graphical formula” strategy.
3. A formula written out in plaintext, but with some of the operators
missing, making NVDA announce it as a big number (mainly happens when
dealing with exponentiation), for example 102 instead of 10^2.
Is there something I should be doing differently here?
I would have thought reading maths would be like reading anything else...How
wrong I am. Cheers. Damien.
Most people have more than the average number of legs.
Please reply to the list;
please *don't* CC me.