it is my impression that the two browsers are vastly different, so why
should they look the same in jaws? This is not a complaint, it is an
observation. When I fire up firefox, it looks like ie to me so if I
am going to use a browser and have a choice of one that looks like ie
and one that is ie, I'll use ie. If I get better functionality from
one than the other and the one I get better functionality from does
not look like the other one, I will use that one.
This goes back to what we get handfed in windows. When I looked at
opera on the Mac, it did not look like safari does from the standpoint
of voice over.
On Dec 29, 2008, at 10:07 AM, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
On 29/12/08 14:17, David Poehlman wrote:
but the point is that they are different browsers so should not look
the
same in jaws.
When I used real player it was vastly different from
windows media player and so on but this is off topic I guess. If I
want
IE, I'll use IE. If I want ff, I should be able to use ff not some
transform to IE.
I can't understand what you're asking for. What essential character of
Firefox is not available to JAWS?
You seem to be complaining that Firefox is not sufficiently different
to Internet Explorer (as though difference were automatically a good
thing), not about some aspect of its accessibility.
--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
