https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15491
--- Comment #4 from Aryeh Gregor <[email protected]> 2010-07-25 18:34:27 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > ALL of them, as far as I know. I'm unaware of any screen reader that will do > anything with pure-presentation markup (b, i, u, s, font, etc.), which are > only > useful for [fully-]sighted user, unless the user overrides the default > behavior > of ignoring them. Screen readers generally *will* do something audibly > different with each sematic markup tag (again, unless overridden). Instead of > pestering me about this sort of thing bug after bug after bug, please just go > do some research on Web accessibility; this is honestly getting very tedious. I do know something (not a lot, I freely admit) about web accessibility. What I knew about screen readers made me believe that <ins> and <u> would be treated the same. I just downloaded the JAWS trial version, and I have confirmed that without my reconfiguring anything, all markup like <ins>, <u>, <strong>, <b>, whatever seems to be totally ignored. Specifically, this page: data:text/html,<!doctype html><title>Test</title><ins>Hello</ins> when loaded in Firefox, is read as "One hundred percent. Page has no links. Test hello". It's read in exactly the same way if I replace <ins> by anything else, like <u> or <strong> or <b> or <i> or <em>. There is no change in tone or anything. "Foo <ins>bar</ins> <del>baz</del> quuz" is read as "Foo bar baz quuz". I don't blame you for not being willing to put in the work to test things. I also don't blame you for being overconfident and assuming that your knowledge of screen readers was correct. But I really have to object to the fact that when you made a statement without providing any supporting evidence, and were asked to provide evidence, your response was to tell *me* to do the research, in a condescending tone no less. If you do not have evidence, you should say so. Not having evidence beyond hearsay and rumor is fine, but you should not act as though your claims are well-supported and obviously correct when they are not. So, anyway, I did do the research. At least for this screen reader -- the most popular one in the world, in its default configuration as far as I can tell -- you are mistaken. If, again, you have specific evidence to the contrary, I would be interested in hearing it, just as a matter of general knowledge about screen readers. But in the future, I will continue to "pester" you and everyone else for evidence when you make claims that I suspect are incorrect. Of course, this is still a bug and should still be fixed. But correct conclusions do not justify erroneous arguments. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
