To make this clear, what I am talking about is the accessibility of
the browser. It does not have to look and feel like ie to be
accessible yet, that is what freedomscientific decided to do.
On Dec 29, 2008, at 11:08 AM, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
On 29/12/08 15:15, David Poehlman wrote:
it is my impression that the two browsers are vastly different, so why
should they look the same in jaws?
They have differences. Whether they are "vastly different" is a matter
of opinion I suppose; note your recent email where you insist a
"browser is a browser"! The question is whether the differences are
relevant to your perceptions of "sameness".
Can you identify some actual differences between Internet Explorer 7
and Firefox 3, that you'd expect to be reflected in the user
experience JAWS 10 presents, but are not?
I don't think Mozilla aims to make Firefox different for the sake of
being different. I think it's aiming at being the best browser, but
that often involves a lot of being the same.
This goes back to what we get handfed in windows.
I'm not sure what handfeeding you're talking about.
When I looked at opera
on the Mac, it did not look like safari does from the standpoint of
voice over.
Not of all those differences are necessarily intended.
Note also that users get confused by the differences in interface
(witness Jacob's complain about navigation in Opera).
--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
