InformAction Forums

Identities Infinite wrote:I thought the sighted always notice when a graphic is clickable.

If it isn't obvious from the graphic, such as in the "Edit" and "Quote" things in our forum, it's obvious only onmouseover, when the pointer changes to an icon of a hand, signaling "You can click this". Or if one notices the link destination in the lower left of the browser, but it's in very small font, and not prominent.

Something is blocking a lot of images at duck for me. Left and right of the duck logo, the pointer also becomes a hand. The tooltip shows "About duckduckgo", and that URL in the lower left is https://duckduckgo.com/about.html. Yet no images show. I'll investigate that some time.

I did not know it was a 'box' because I do not correlate text edit fields with a physical shape. Multi-line text edit fields are labelled 'textarea' in HTML code but I can not recall the single-line which I think this is.

I'm still on a learning curve on your terminology. As you've noticed, there are a lot of colloquialisms or simplifications in everyday language.

Nearly all search fields, whether at search engines, within sites (like ours), or wherever, are single-line only. They are usually a rectangle that is one line high, accommodating one line of text, and of a width chosen by the coder. The simple rectangular shape suggests "box", although technically, they are "fields".
Please remember that most home users have almost no tech knowledge beyond how to use the thing, so they probably don't know terms like "field" or "textarea".

"Edit" is commonly used for that specific command, whether in posting here, modifying a text document, etc. In other words, to change something. If you want to modify something you have already posted, or if I as a moderator need to edit a user's post, the "Edit" command opens the post in the compose box, in raw form, so changes can be made and re-posted. We normally don't think of a place to *enter* text as an "Edit" field, whether it be a search entry, a username or password entry, etc. We just think of it as a box in which to enter text, even if not is that the strict coding term.

In doing support, I try to remember that many users are not tech-savvy, and so use the everyday common names given to these elements, rather than their HTML attribute names or whatever. Does this explain some of the terminology issues?

Yes, yes it does. JAWS speaks names of controls so that is why I use the terminology. In software applications I think they are called class assignments.

I understand.

You may find it interesting how the "Search" field in the top banner of this site is labeled in the source code:
Note the div I D of "search-box", and "class=inputbox search". Then two lines later, "input class=button2".

So we see "box" being used in actual coding, both as a div I D and as a class. Also, once again a "button" is a defined class type. This is the rectangular box containing the text name, "Search", which the user clicks after entering the search term in the preceding box. it is not a URL link, but an action. Hence, I would assume that JAWS reads the text, "Search". How does it identify the preceding box? Many such, as at Wikipedia, are empty, but ours contains a spyglass icon and the word "Search..." The user overwrites that.

Another annoying change I just noticed in F10 vs. F3, regarding showing link destinations onmouseover if you also have the Find toolbar open. (Ctrl+F, or Firefox Edit menu, Find). In F3, the destination URL still shows in the extreme lower left of the browser. In F10, at first it seemed not to appear at all. Then I noticed that this very small font merely shifted from the default position of extreme lower left to extreme lower right. Why? Why shouldn't it remain where it did in earlier versions? I wasn't expecting it on the right side, and so didn't notice it for a while.

This is a Human Factors Engineering issue -- to try to maintain as much GUI consistency in placement of elements from one version to the next, even though other elements may be added or removed. I see no benefit to the change in behavior "IF FInd Toolbar Open", and see no harm in leaving as it was. Very puzzling to the sighted, whereas JAWS probably still finds it without difficulty. And a reminder of how much the sighted rely on the tiniest visual cues, and that Mozilla should remember this before moving things around. Okay, that's my rant for the day. [grin]

JAWS does read Search when focused on the field. It is also noteworthy that the maximum length is 128 characters. I guess box is correct enough for me to use since it is used in actual source code.

JAWS finds that text wherever no matter if it switches from corner to corner. I would have not known if you said nothing. Interesting because it was not broke but yet they thought they had to try to fix it.

Identities Infinite wrote:JAWS finds that text wherever no matter if it switches from corner to corner. I would have not known if you said nothing. Interesting because it was not broke but yet they thought they had to try to fix it.

And one of those cases where the sighted are further inconvenienced, but the non-sighted are not. [smile]

What's worse is that in F2 and F3, the location of URL destinations was fixed inside what was called the Status Bar, which included some add-on icons on the right, had room for various other things, and the destination was always to the far left, black font on a light gray background, very easy to read. In F4+, they removed the status bar completely -- please don't ask why; mostly playing copycat to Chrome browser -- so the link destination is merely a pop-up, in the same general area as the message body or the rest of the page, and with an extremely thin gray focus line on top and to the right. Nothing below or to the left, so it's not even a complete focus box or rectangle.

I was effected by the Firefox 4 change as well. They renamed it to the Add-On Bar which was not shown by default so when I pressed the specially-made ALT+G shorcut the Ghostery developer implemented it did not work. That was when I almost switched back to 3.* but the accessibility improvements kept me from reverting. If I still used that branch I would notice a big difference. The sad thing is Freedom Scientific is still trying to catch up with making JAWS fully compatible with the new versions of Firefox. They are only at version 8 right now so that should speak volumes.

Mozilla needs to be aware of how much of a burden their rapid release cycles place on the developers of all apps, but especially of such highly-specialized and complex apps, which by definition have a very limited market. Perhaps include that in the comments if you file the Bugzilla report on the lack of audible spell-check warning, or post it in the Mozillazine forum. And again, one individual user may not have much of an impact, but why aren't *all vendors* of accessibility apps using their combined weight to make an impact at Mozilla?

What do you mean by accessibility applications? Add-ons? If so there really are not much in existence. I registered on the Bugzilla tracker and that was when I used Enigmail. Foolishly I checked the encryption option and now can not read the password reset e-mail. I am locked out but I guess I can re-register with Hushmail.

Identities Infinite wrote:What do you mean by accessibility applications?

JAWS, for example.

I registered on the Bugzilla tracker and that was when I used Enigmail. Foolishly I checked the encryption option and now can not read the password reset e-mail. I am locked out but I guess I can re-register with Hushmail.

You can register there with any ordinary email. The site is has an encrypted connection, but so does any online bank.

If you are ever interested in screen readers and how they work try NVDA if you do not want a hefty package such as JAWS. It is open-source for those who speak fluent code . The eSpeak synthesiser can get annoying but it is a really noticeable improvement over SAPI. I like the different English dialects such as Swahili [might take a bit of getting used to for some].

I once registered with the Gmail address but back then I used PGP. I checked the PGP option and whenever I try to reset my password the e-mails are encrypted. The only way around this is to register with this new Hushmail address because the administrative inbox to which I did send an e-mail never responded. Back then I did not foresee me not using PGP.

Since you use JAWS, examining a different product may not be beneficial to me. You're the only non-sighted user that I've dealt with, at least this extensively, and I've picked up a lot about JAWS from our conversations. I'm happy to spend time helping any and all users, along with trying to make a living in the Real World, friends, family, hobbies, and all of that stuff, but installing a new app and learning all about it would take away time that could be used in assisting users, including yourself. If it really becomes unfathomable, maybe then. I'm sure you understand.

Sure do. I tend to suggest it to developers who do not want to reboot every 40 minutes when using JAWS without activating it.

After asking a private torrent tracker to allow Hushmail [they say data is handed over to people with power with no hesitation] one of the administrators sent me this. Does this still apply today? It is dated 2007 but if it still applies it worries me my privacy is not too much better than with Google Mail.

This is why I said to enable the local Java encryption applet, so that it's encoded before even leaving your machine.

There is the possibility that they could send a compromised applet under direct court order, but as the article notes:

The extra security given by the Java applet is not particularly relevant, in the practical sense, if an individual account is targeted. (emphasis added) [...]
Hushmail won’t protect law violators being chased by patient law enforcement officials, according to Smith.
[Hushmail] is useful for avoiding general Carnivore-type government surveillance, and protecting your data from hackers, but definitely not suitable for protecting your data if you are engaging in illegal activity that could result in a Canadian court order.

If you are doing illegal things that would cause a Canadian court to issue orders to Hush, then not only should you not use it, but I don't want to be assisting you any more.

The only real alternative is to have your own PGP-enabled client. I was told by a professional security expert that most available ones have flaws found now and then, as all software does, and rolling your own is not trivial. I didn't want to bother with the Thunderbird/Enigmail combo, but you might look into that and other alternatives.

I allow all blocked objects but use the new interface. That one is so much better than the old one because the old interface has so many blank frames for some reason. The applet frame I think I notice but there is nothing in it. Must I go to Hush Tools or Encryption-related sections to activate it? I try to stay with the newer interface whenever possible.

I am not doing anything illegal under Canadian law; I just want to be more safe than I was the last 5 years. Nothing wrong with that.