right. it's kind of like saying using the jaws cursor to do something is less than adequate or perhaps the virtual cursor?
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dennis Bartlett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS X by theblind" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 6:47 PM Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: Bugs in Address Book to he help on the fields. I still haven't figured this out because when creating a new card I don't see the fields. On 3-Apr-08, at 4:46 PM, David Poehlman wrote: > so what is vo-h for anyway? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Simon Cavendish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS > X by > theblind" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 4:20 PM > Subject: Re: Bugs in Address Book > > > I do not think that the VO plus H fix should be acceptable as run-of- > themill solution for what is really a problem with address book. If > fields are not recognised properly as what they are, or if buttons are > not labelled in the way that would eliminate the use of VO plus h then > things obviously have to be improved. Maybe I'm just a purist but I > think that to recognise room for improvement is not necessarily bad > but to accept a second-rate fix is certainly not good enough. > > With best wishes > > Simon > On 3 Apr 2008, at 17:04, Josh de Lioncourt wrote: > >> >> I agree there are some minor issues, but they are not show >> stoppers. VO-H is your friend in lots of programs, and that solves >> 99% of the problems with Address Book. I love the program with VO. >> In fact, it's the first address book program I've liked well enough >> to actually keep up to date and use regularly. The biggest problem >> is the editing of some of the textual info, which is flakey >> sometimes, and definitely a problem, but the program overall is >> quite good and I am surprised to see a few here giving it such harsh >> criticism. Problems with far more access issues are Skype, >> Interface Builder, the iWork suite, Logic, and plenty of others both >> from third-parties and from Apple. >> >> I do think the problems should be addressed, and I have reported >> them to Apple as well, but they do not prevent you from using the >> program by any stretch. THey are minor annoyances. >> >> Josh de Lioncourt >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> ...my other mail provider is an owl... >> >> >> >> On 3 Apr, 2008, at 8:26 AM, Chuck Reichel wrote: >> >>>> Hi List, >>> >>> Yes address book has been very poor at best! How many of us have >>> reported this to Accessibility? I have not yet but have been >>> watching and waiting for address book to get its act together! >>> Accessibility has been responsive for me so far. most recently when >>> I reported the Preview bug about how you can not annotate pdfs, >>> they said that bug would be submitted to engineering . >>> "The squeeky wheel gets the grease! So lets politely speak up! >>> Chuck Reichel Phone "954"742-0019 or >>> http://www.soundpicturerecording.com/ >>> " >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I have found the following bug in the address book with VoiceOver: >>>> >>>> Field types are not voiced. When you navigate over a field the >>>> information expected is not voiced. For example in the Email field >>>> you will hear Work, Edit text blank but not the fact that the edit >>>> text field is expecting an email address. How would a blind person >>>> know what this field expected for content? This is true with all >>>> fields that have visual but not audible indications of the type of >>>> information expected. >>>> >>>> Inconsistent voicing of text being entered. In a phone field for >>>> example it is common that VoiceOver will not voice the first >>>> number entered. Sometimes it fails to voice other letters or >>>> numbers. >>>> >>>> >>>> Greg Kearney >>>> 535 S. Jackson St. >>>> Casper, Wyoming 82601 >>>> 307-224-4022 >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> >> > > > > > Dennis Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED] skype: dsbartlett
