freedom scientific does use msaa more and more. It is just not the core of their activity since they already had a good modem. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths@xxxxxxxxx> To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 1:34 PM Subject: Re: Mozilla Hi. Well what Greg said makes sense. Unless Freedom science fiction decided to make their own variation of msaa, which I think is highly unlikely. Explorer has caused a general protection fault in module kernel32.dll. I'm sick of Winblows! On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, David Poehlman wrote: > I wouldn't jump to any conclusions. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gregory Nowak" <greg at romualt.dhs.org> > To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> > Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 1:12 PM > Subject: Re: Mozilla > > > Since window-eyes already supports anything with msaa, I think gw-micro > is covered for netscape support if it indeed contains msaa. > Greg > > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 09:51:03AM -0400, Whitley GS11 Cecil H wrote: > > Hello, > > I hesitate to even mention this because I don't want to start another > > battle. However, I feel that there is a segment of this community > that this > > effects and who will be interested. Yesterday in my wanderings (I was > > checking out the latest status of Gnome) I ran across some very > interesting > > information. Mozilla currently supports MSAA on the Windows platform. > > Since the VP of development for Freedom Scientific had testified in > April > > that Netscape does not support accessability I found it curious to say > the > > least that Netscape uses Mozilla's technology in it's latest browser > and > > therefore supports both MSAA and DOM. > > > > Okay, what's my point? Simply this, I wrote > > suggestions at freedomscientific.com and requested that they support > Mozilla on > > the Windows platform given that the Mozilla developers are suporting > > accessability in their product. I indicated that I felt their company > > should suport Mozilla at least as well as they suport Internet > Explorer > > given that it provides more choice for the visually impaired > community. I > > know that some of the users on this list would benefit from experience > with > > Mozilla on windows so that they are "up to speed" on it once it is > available > > under Gnome. So with that said, I would like to request that if you > are a > > jaws user (or any other windows screen reader for that matter) that > you let > > your voice be heard by your respective vendor. > > > > I realize that lynx and links won't go away simply because a GUI is > > available, however much of the point of Mozilla is it's ability to be > > imbedded within apps. Feedback from the community as a whole would be > > benificial to insure that the product is as accessable as possible for > those > > who will "have" to use it. > > > > Regards, > > > > Cecil > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Speakup mailing list > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > _______________________________________________ Speakup mailing list Speakup at braille.uwo.ca http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
