The way to break away from MSAA is far simpler than one would think.   
A developer can switch to iAccessible2 (an API made by IBM for  
Windows) which is a superset of MSAA so they can migrate without  
throwing away usable code.
On Sep 8, 2009, at 6:21 AM, Scott Howell wrote:

>
> I'm not a programmer, but I'll hazard a guess that maybe the issue now
> is that MSAA has become such a heavily used facility for windows-based
> screen readers, that now it would take an amazing amount of work to
> break away from that. So, it in other words in for a penny in for a
> pound.
> On Sep 7, 2009, at 4:31 PM, Mike Arrigo wrote:
>
>>
>> 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 [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to