Hello,

It is a kind of problem that many on the list have had a bit of a thing with. Basically, vo+f command will only find things on the page which are actually visible on the screen whereas in Jaws it would scroll the entire content of the webpage to find the text you are looking for. So in Leopard this command has a very limited use I feel.

However, you can accomplish a similar result by using vo+i command for item chooser menu where you can type your string and it will find a selection for you to choose from on the entire page. Then you hit the enter key on the one you wish and voiceover cursor will land on it. If it's a link you can activate it. If it is a piece of text, you can explore around it. Be aware that if the text you are looking for is a part of the group on the webpage, when exploring round the text, you will be within the group as if you had first chosen to interact with it. You have to stop intearacting with it to get out of it to move somewhere else on the page. Hope this helps, Simon
On 20 Sep 2008, at 15:19, WWJD wrote:

Hey guys, I'm noticing something a little bit peculiar over here. The only thing that I suspect, is maybe I am not quite understanding the concept of this, but who knows.

Basicly, here's the thing:

Ya know how if you do a vo+F, how it'll say search Text, then you can type a search query and hit return? Like, here: let me give ya an example:

If you for instance, go to ACBRadio.org in Safari, then after interacting with the html content, assuming you're not like me, and have it set to do that automatically, then you hit vo+F, then try typing in the word "listen" obviously, without the quote marks. I only put those there to show you what I was stating to type. LOL! Anyway, so, put that, then hit return. Boom. You land on the listen link. It's kind a like in JAWS under Windows, doing a virtual find. Well, where I am however getting a little confused, is I've noticed this command not to be very reliable. I have seen that about 75 to 80 percent of the time, it won't work. It just throws mee right back on the item in the web page that I already am in. Now, one thing I will! say to yall, is, I have voiceover set to not! wrap text. Meaning when I reach the right most edge of a line, it just makes a bwank, kind a sound, and won't wrap. I think it's under navigation in the voiceover utility. In any rate, I say that as I dono if that would be a facter here. I don't think it would, but I'm trying my hardest to reason logically through this in my head. Anyway, I see that 3 quarters of the time I do this, it just lands me back, like I say, on the item that I was already focused on. So, this leads me to basicly wonder if: Is this command in Voiceover really all that reliably dependable, and if so, have yall had good success with it? The other thing that I wonder, is could it be, that the reason it is not working a lotta the time, is cause the item that I queried and searched for, isn't visually visible on the screen. In, other, words, could! it be, that, maybe, it only works if the item you are searching for is currently on the physical screen. I wonder if it only works with those items. Meaning, let's say we have a web page, and you gotta scroll down the page, to see what you searched for. Because you had to scroll, as that item isn't actually visually on the screen, I wonder if thus, the vo+F isn't seeing it. Like maybe if I scrolled down the page then! diddit, it maybe then! it would a worked, as it would have seen the item. This is just my observation of theory. I never clamed it to be right, however, aside it being logical, that is the only thing I'm basing this on. So, someone correct me if I'm wrong. It's honestly slightly annoying. Yeah, I know there is the item chooser menu, and yes, it does work extraordinarily well, but, I just am so used to being able to do the old find command, and it work, even if the item's not on the actual screen, that it's gonna be a little weird me breaking that habbit.

Anyway, if yall have any ideas, I'd really be interested in hearing what you gotta say.

Chris.



Reply via email to