Hey Chris, it's interesting that you mention the whole off screen model, actually I'm amazed that voice over does as well as it does without one, I wonder if windows screen readers will ever be able to move away from this approach, I think the only screen reader that does not have one is NVDA, and from what I've heard, it's fairly limited. On Sep 7, 2009, at 9:09 AM, Chris Hofstader wrote:
> > Hi, > > Probably because I was once a VP at Freedom Scientific, I see the > value in and strongly support adding scripting to VO. > > I agree that using scripts to launch applications from within a screen > reader should be discouraged and I agree that some other things you > mention in your email should be avoided as there are other techniques > to get the same job. > > The fear that "VO will turn into JAWS for Macintosh," is mostly > unfounded though. The reason JAWS needs scripts for virtually every > application it supports is that they have an OSM and, given relative > screen coordinates can tease the text drawn directly without MSAA or > iAccessible2 involved. This helps make the completely inaccessible > into something that is marginally and sometimes very accessible. > > VO has no OSM. Even with the new scripting facility, it cannot > correct the owner drawn interfaces (I've been trying to get VO and > MacSpeech Dictate to talk and its a hemorrhoid of a project). What > AppleScript gives us is the ability to add features to a combination > of programs where the authors did a decent job of making their > software accessible but the user would benefit from some very deep > contextual information that would be very difficult for a generic API > to deliver. > > I read a post (I think on this list) about reading table headers in > the iWork spreadsheet. the post said it works great if the headers > are on the top row but starts to fail if they are elsewhere. > > So, why not write a script that allows multiple tables, each with > their own headings to exist in a single spreadsheet? No API is smart > enough to do this but, I would think that a script driven > communication system between VO and the worksheet could do it in a > fairly straight forward manner. This script could also "mangle" the > worksheet file name in a manner that is unique so, if you reload the > same document, your headers will be there for you. Even cooler, if > you open a spreadsheet with a very similar name (Sales Report > 1/1/2009, Sales Report 2/1/2009, etc.) they will probably have the > same format and the user can be offered the opportunity to load last > month's headers. > > There are lots of ideas that can be expressed in scripts that a > generic screen reader cannot understand. > > Happy Curt Flood Day, > cdh > On Sep 7, 2009, at 8:52 AM, Jes Smith wrote: > >> >> Hi all. >> >> I am greatly concerned that voice over now has support for scripting. >> Especially now that you can make voice over launch an application >> with >> a single script. I'm not talking about glancing at the time or seeing >> how many unread messages you have in mail. I'm talking about opening >> up apps like mail or Safari from within Voice OVer. I am concerned >> that voice over is starting to become a bit like Jaws, and that if we >> don't get a grip on it now, voice over will become Jaws for >> Macintosh. >> I, like Mike Arrigo, don't feel that launching apps is something that >> should be implemented in a screen reader. Also, I fear that the use >> of >> apple scripts will replace the responsibility of an application >> developer to make their application accessible right out of the box. >> On the Windows side, if something isn't accessible with Jaws, you >> just >> download scripts for it. What if you go to another person's computer >> and they don't have the scripts for the app you are trying to use? >> It's my belief that a certain article from the NFB prompted this >> scripting support. Folks, the thing I like about voice over is that >> it >> gives the blind user the same conceptual layout and information as it >> appears on the screen to a sighted user. No other screen reader does >> this, and we should keep voice over as a screen reader, and let it >> be. >> If we don't, eventually, when we try and contact an Apple developer, >> they will either ignore us, or will say, "Well, just download the >> scripts for my application and you will have access." >> Any thoughts? If someone disagrees with me, I'd love to hear your >> arguments, not so that I can persuade you to agree with me, but so >> that I can have a new perspective. >> >> Jes >> >> >>> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
