Re: [tdf-discuss] Accessibility (was Java dependency)

2010-11-03 Thread Michael Meeks
On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 02:08 +, jonathon wrote: Is there a better alternative for Windows users? Roughly five years ago, IBM promised to deliver a better A11Y solution for Windows to OOo. AFAIK, that hasn't yet happened. Agreed - this will be the best solution in the end.

Re: [tdf-discuss] Accessibility (was Java dependency)

2010-11-03 Thread Christoph Noack
Hi Jonathon! Am Mittwoch, den 03.11.2010, 06:47 -0400 schrieb Michael Meeks: On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 02:08 +, jonathon wrote: [... Important Accessibility Stuff ...] Maybe helpful, maybe not ... there has been a talk about the current A11Y status within OOo at the OOoCon this year. Maybe

[tdf-discuss] Accessibility (was Java dependency)

2010-11-02 Thread T. J. Brumfield
I'm moving this into another thread. Jonathon suggested that LibO fails at accesibility requirements. Doing a few quick Google searches, it seems that OOo and thusly LibO uses the Java Accessibility API to enable the use of screen readers and braille devices. This is primarily used for Windows.

Re: [tdf-discuss] Accessibility (was Java dependency)

2010-11-02 Thread jonathon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11/02/2010 07:56 PM, T. J. Brumfield wrote: LibO uses the Java Accessibility API to enable the use of screen readers and braille devices. Screen reading is not the only thing that that API can be used for. Is there a better alternative for

Re: [tdf-discuss] Accessibility (was Java dependency)

2010-11-02 Thread Robert Derman
T. J. Brumfield wrote: I'm moving this into another thread. Jonathon suggested that LibO fails at accesibility requirements. Doing a few quick Google searches, it seems that OOo and thusly LibO uses the Java Accessibility API to enable the use of screen readers and braille devices. This is