<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More screen reader tests</title>
	<link>http://www.access-matters.com/2005/04/24/more-screen-reader-tests/</link>
	<description>Seeking Best Accessibility Practices</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 22:12:36 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Priestap</title>
		<link>http://www.access-matters.com/2005/04/24/more-screen-reader-tests/#comment-289</link>
		<author>Mark Priestap</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2005 12:34:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.access-matters.com/2005/04/24/more-screen-reader-tests/#comment-289</guid>
					<description>Wow, thanks for doing all this great work! Unfortunately I'm more discouraged than ever. lol.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, thanks for doing all this great work! Unfortunately I&#8217;m more discouraged than ever. lol.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: vdebolt</title>
		<link>http://www.access-matters.com/2005/04/24/more-screen-reader-tests/#comment-293</link>
		<author>vdebolt</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2005 16:12:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.access-matters.com/2005/04/24/more-screen-reader-tests/#comment-293</guid>
					<description>I'm really interested in whether some of the new technologies for voice, such as Mac OS X Tiger VoiceOver or the Opera 8 voice tools change the rules that say accessible sites must work with JavaScript turned off. Are all or most screen readers still unable to work with JavaScript?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m really interested in whether some of the new technologies for voice, such as Mac OS X Tiger VoiceOver or the Opera 8 voice tools change the rules that say accessible sites must work with JavaScript turned off. Are all or most screen readers still unable to work with JavaScript?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Belov</title>
		<link>http://www.access-matters.com/2005/04/24/more-screen-reader-tests/#comment-405</link>
		<author>Charles Belov</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 May 2005 21:08:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.access-matters.com/2005/04/24/more-screen-reader-tests/#comment-405</guid>
					<description>The rule that sites must work when JavaScript is turned off does not necessarily relate to screen readers. It allows for the fact that someone may have turned JavaScript off for any accessibility or other reason. Also, the Lynx text-only browser does not support JavaScript.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The rule that sites must work when JavaScript is turned off does not necessarily relate to screen readers. It allows for the fact that someone may have turned JavaScript off for any accessibility or other reason. Also, the Lynx text-only browser does not support JavaScript.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Belov</title>
		<link>http://www.access-matters.com/2005/04/24/more-screen-reader-tests/#comment-406</link>
		<author>Charles Belov</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 May 2005 21:12:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.access-matters.com/2005/04/24/more-screen-reader-tests/#comment-406</guid>
					<description>Also, it allows for the fact that browsers may not consistently support JavaScript. I received a report that the Blazer 3.0 browser, used on certain cell phones, does not properly support the JavaScript on one of our pages. Someone who surfs on a cell phone may not be able to choose another browser, and do you really want to test your JavaScript on all the different cell phones?  (Of course, I'm not sure whether they would even have the option to turn JavaScript off; I don't believe WebTV has that capability.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also, it allows for the fact that browsers may not consistently support JavaScript. I received a report that the Blazer 3.0 browser, used on certain cell phones, does not properly support the JavaScript on one of our pages. Someone who surfs on a cell phone may not be able to choose another browser, and do you really want to test your JavaScript on all the different cell phones?  (Of course, I&#8217;m not sure whether they would even have the option to turn JavaScript off; I don&#8217;t believe WebTV has that capability.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Stenhouse</title>
		<link>http://www.access-matters.com/2005/04/24/more-screen-reader-tests/#comment-407</link>
		<author>Mike Stenhouse</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2005 10:59:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.access-matters.com/2005/04/24/more-screen-reader-tests/#comment-407</guid>
					<description>To back up what Charles said, I tried to find cinema listings on a Blackberry over the weekend and was confounded by the use of JavaScript to submit the only form that would let me get access to listings for my local Vue/Warner. I went elsewhere... It's worth remembering that sensible use of JS makes good commercial sense as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To back up what Charles said, I tried to find cinema listings on a Blackberry over the weekend and was confounded by the use of JavaScript to submit the only form that would let me get access to listings for my local Vue/Warner. I went elsewhere&#8230; It&#8217;s worth remembering that sensible use of JS makes good commercial sense as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
