Re: Firefox Quantum and add-ons


Gene
 

I'm not writing this to try to convince you to not want these sounds.  I'm going into it because I want to make the point to others following the thread that if you become so dependent on sounds that you don't use, other methods when sounds become or never are available, then, in most cases, you are too dependent on one way of doing things.  the more adaptable a blind computer user is, the more likely he or she is to be able to use the most number of programs and to cope with unexpected accessibility problems. 
 
Here are examples of how to use Firefox efficiently without sounds.  When a page finishes downloading, NVDA starts reading automatically.  When you press enter on a link, if it doesn't do anything you'll know.  You may not know instantly, but you'll know and this is seldom a problem. 
 
If you open the library during a download, you can hear the estimated time a download should take.  You can then go back and check the window later to see if it has finished after that time has passed. 
 
I'm not saying there are no efficiencies lost by not having sounds, but they are minor. 
 
Gene
----- Original Message -----

Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 5:17 AM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons

Well yes but some useful add ons are simply no longer made for the new one.
One is navigational sounds. To my mind it would be trivial for Mozilla to
insert  optional sounds in their own code, particularly for click a
link/button etc, and page loaded and end of download.
 Thiose are the main reason I use Waterfox.
 brian

bglists@...
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal E-mail to:-
briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene" <gsasner@...>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 4:24 AM
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


Here's what I found out.  Uninstalling and reinstalling didn't change
anything.  The problem was that I was using a very slow connection for a bit
and I didn't realize how slow it was.  I was notified that Noscript had been
added but it hadn't been.  When I went through the procedure again, it was
and it is accessible.  So I now know that Quantum itself doesn't cause
accessibility problems if the add-ons are designed to be accessible.

Gene
----- Original Message -----

From: Gene
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 10:01 PM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


I had thought that when Quantum was introduced, it might have degraded
add-on accessibility even if the add-ons should be accessible but that might
not be the case.  I've seen very little discussion of this and the very
little I'd seen seemed to imply that but as I said, that may not be the
case.

Gene
----- Original Message -----

From: Brian Vogel
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2018 8:57 PM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] Firefox Quantum and add-ons


Gene,

          Your best bet with regard to add-ons (Firefox) or extensions
(Chrome) is to contact the developers of each.

           I am confused by "Firefox Chrome" (as the two browsers are
disjoint) as well as "Quantum Chrome" as Quantum was the name given when
Firefox dropped Gecko as its rendering engine, but not for Chrome.  Chrome
and Quantum are unconnected.

           Of course, in the land of web coding, the only thing that's going
to get any attention is what is current or upcoming.  They'll never go back
to previous versions of a given add-on/extension that have been supplanted.

--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1809, Build 17763

A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for
illusion is deep.

          ~ Saul Bellow, To Jerusalem and Back











Join nvda@nvda.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.