On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 16:50:46 -0700, Linda W <[email protected]> wrote:

> Someone else mentioned blind people using screen readers -- they
> certainly don't
> appreciate bottom posting -- in fact.  Since people are demanding
> plaintext to support blind readers (supposedly -- most readers are smart
> enough to parse plain HTML),  BUT most readers can't know what to skip
> over as previously read text. 

If you don't use HTML then they are smart enough.

In my last job I spent several years being responsible for checking
software with screen readers. When I was unable to see a screen I
needed three things from email: context /before/ the reply, trimming
of all unnecessary quotes, and a clear distinction between quotes and
new material. HTML and top-posted mail provided none of those.

With text mails all quotes were marked off with ">" at the start of
the line. Some MUAs can be configured to collapse the quotes, while
others can be configured to display them differently (which is picked
up by the screen reader as a change in voice). Either way, it was no
problem distinguishing between quoted and new material with the screen
reader. But with HTML that marker is lost.

>     I think people here should consider the effect their demands have on 
> other people. 
> If you give the reason of enforcing plaintext to make things easier for blind 
> people,
> then I would point out -- that blind people are going to be reading a message 
> from top
> to bottom and don't want to have to re-read all the context each time they 
> reread
> a message.

With top-posted mail there's no standard way of indicating where the
new material ends, and no context to help you understand what the text
you're reading is about. I don't think you understand just how easy
it is to lose track of where you are when your only contact with the
computer is a voice reading out one tiny part of the screen at a time.
The first time I ever used a screen reader I became hopelessly lost in
under two minutes. Fortunately for me, I had the option of turning the
monitor back on.

You see a quote before text as something to be skipped over. You can
see that the message you've just opened is right below the one you
were just reading, so you know that it's going to be a reply to that
message. But blind people don't have all those visual cues. All they
have is the first few words of a message being read out to them. If
that is a short quote then they have the context they need, spoken in
a voice that tells them it's a quote. But if the writer just blunders
straight in with their new text then not only does the blind user have
no idea whether this is related to the message they've just read, one
they read two days ago or something completely new, but also they have
no way of easily locating the context because there's no standard for
indicating quotes in top-posted mail.

If you really cared about blind users you wouldn't be advocating a
policy that's aimed squarely at people who can see a whole screen full
of visual cues.

-- 
Matthew Winn

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to