From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v5Q5mln6009577 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 01:48:47 -0400 Received: by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) id 638657DE39; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 05:48:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (ext-mx07.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.110.31]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E08D7DDE7 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 05:48:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pta-mxout1.csir.co.za (pta-mxout1.csir.co.za [146.64.81.172]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A526C01EE81 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 05:48:35 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 3A526C01EE81 Authentication-Results: ext-mx07.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=csir.co.za Authentication-Results: ext-mx07.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wvdwalt@csir.co.za DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 3A526C01EE81 Received: from pta-mxout1.csir.co.za (146.64.10.8) by pta-mxout1.csir.co.za (0.0.0.0) GWAVA SMTP; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 07:48:38 +0200 X-Spam_ID: str=0001.0A160204.5950A035.0029:SCFSTAT37622878, ss=1, re=-4.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0 X-GWAVADAT: sefKgKkjTjeimWQv1fba617d3349c79d5eb85138f0f26a9a96dea68f025d3d855b92983e83386b581bvs7nl.1bvsdgn.24 Received: from willempc.meraka.csir.co.za (unknown [146.64.217.6]) by ls-mx5.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B92E30076C for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 07:48:32 +0200 (SAST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by willempc.meraka.csir.co.za with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dPMsy-0003NU-92 for blinux-list@redhat.com; Mon, 26 Jun 2017 07:48:32 +0200 Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 07:48:32 +0200 (SAST) X-X-Sender: wvdwalt@willempc.meraka.csir.co.za To: Linux for blind general discussion Subject: Re: text browsers and current web standards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, Sender IP whitelisted by DNSRBL, ACL 203 matched, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.31]); Mon, 26 Jun 2017 05:48:43 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: inspected by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.31]); Mon, 26 Jun 2017 05:48:43 +0000 (UTC) for IP:'146.64.81.172' DOMAIN:'pta-mxout1.csir.co.za' HELO:'pta-mxout1.csir.co.za' FROM:'wvdwalt@csir.co.za' RCPT:'' X-RedHat-Spam-Score: -0.702 (BAYES_80, DCC_REPUT_00_12, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, RP_MATCHES_RCVD, SPF_PASS) 146.64.81.172 pta-mxout1.csir.co.za 146.64.81.172 pta-mxout1.csir.co.za X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 10.5.110.31 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 X-loop: blinux-list@redhat.com From: Linux for blind general discussion X-BeenThere: blinux-list@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: junk Reply-To: blinux-list@redhat.com List-Id: Linux for blind general discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 05:48:47 -0000 No I am not a member of that group. I will look into the latest lynx. By the sound of it there was some new development. Regards, Willem On Fri, 23 Jun 2017, Linux for blind general discussion wrote: > The web standards are here. > www.w3c.org/wai > In the most current edition of lynx here on shellworld there is an option, > support html5. > even this one is older than the w2.8.9.dev14 or so that came out in mid June. > You are a member of the wAI interest group of the w3c? > > > On Fri, 23 Jun 2017, Linux for blind general discussion wrote: > >> The problem we face with text-based browsers is that they do not get >> updated to support the current web standards. >> As much as I love and use lynx the cat, I no longer expect people to make >> their web sites accessible for use with a browser of which the support of >> the standards has fallen behind so much. >> IMHO, for a web browser to be seen as current, it must support at least >> html4, but preferably html5. >> The last update the lynx browser received was related to ssl in some way. >> I am gratefull for that as before that update, some sites became >> inaccessible, simply because the people running them had to update their >> security settings and ssl libraries. >> >> I believe the practical approach to be the one taken by Kirk Reiser when it >> was decided to develope clifox. >> For those who do not know, clifox is basicly a console-only interface to >> firefox. >> Clifox is not out of alfa or at the best beta, but as long as firefox >> itself gets updated to support all the latest standards, clifox will remain >> usable. >> >> Just my twenty cents or so. >> Regards, Willem van der Walt >> >> >> >> On Thu, 22 Jun 2017, Linux for blind general discussion wrote: >> >>> May i ask when wacg 2.0 changed to reflect your point? >>> The success criteria requires a site to support all current and future >>> tools. Lynx is current as of what two weeks ago? >>> Links, and e-links are not actually text based, just text friendly. >>> If developers are excluding populations, many in countries where Internet >>> bondage is an issue use them as well, it is perhaps because of plug & >>> play blind person concepts. those perpetuated, more often than not, by >>> those who feel that all blind people are the same using the same >>> tools. >>> Chimes, let me go back and look at where Paul is sending you. >>> Karen >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 22 Jun 2017, Linux for blind general discussion wrote: >>> >>> > Well, I should note that text based browsers are usually no longer > >>> considered when trying to develop accessible websites, so your mileage > >>> will vary greatly when using a text-based browser, even when a site can > >>> be accessed with no trouble using Firefox, Seamonkey or Chromium. For > >>> example, whereas you had problems accessing the links I posted earlier, > >>> I had no trouble at all accessing them in Firefox. I would copy and > >>> paste the information from the channel contact list I posted, but this > >>> relies on having a link to the contact or support page for each channel > >>> listed, and once you get there, even if I was to be able to copy and > >>> paste each link, the contact or support page will likely be unfriendly > >>> to text only browsers, as they don't adhere to current HTML standards. > >>> Sorry for the trouble, it's just the way even the w3c handles things now > >>> as far as I can tell. >>> > > After doing a rather thorough search for Roku accessibility groups or >>> > blind Roku users, I find only a single post on a blind tech list that > >>> refers to what would appear to be an early model Streaming Stick > >>> available at Walmart last year. So I'll likely start an e-mail list or > >>> similar. Thoughts are welcome, i.e. should this be specific to Roku > >>> devices for the most part, or should it cover all accessible TV devices > >>> including the latest cable box offerings? In answering this question, it > >>> is important to note that the Chromecast and Android TV devices are on > >>> topic on the eyes-free Android list, and the Apple TV is on topic on > >>> AppleVis. About the only thing I can think of at this point that isn't > >>> covered elsewhere is the Amazon Fire TV line, including the Fire TV > >>> Stick, the Fire TV box and the up and coming Fire TV with Alexa, the one > >>> that's a complete TV that is said to be released in the coming months, > >>> not the device that connects to an existing TV. Of course there are also > >>> the LG and Samsung TV's that have accessibility built into their high > >>> end models, and they are also not covered anywhere as far as I know, > >>> although they have varying levels of accessibility and different methods > >>> of accessing screen reader/audible guide features. In any case, if a > >>> general accessible TV list is most desirable, then a general accessible > >>> TV list it will be, although that will quickly go all over the map, so > >>> may be harder to manage, since too many devices with too much variation > >>> in features and methods of access could become problematic. >>> > > The next question would be the format. Is it to be an e-mail list, a >>> > forum, a group on a social media platform, ...? What type of >>> moderation, > if any, do we want? Should it be a strictly on topic list >>> or group, or > should it be very loose and relaxed? Just some starter >>> thoughts. Feel > free to answer any questions or ask questions of your >>> own. >>> > ~ Kyle >>> > > _______________________________________________ >>> > Blinux-list mailing list >>> > Blinux-list@redhat.com >>> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list >>> > > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Blinux-list mailing list >>> Blinux-list@redhat.com >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list >>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> This message is subject to the CSIR's copyright terms and conditions, >> e-mail legal notice, and implemented Open Document Format (ODF) standard. >> The full disclaimer details can be found at >> http://www.csir.co.za/disclaimer.html. Please consider the environment >> before printing this email. _______________________________________________ >> Blinux-list mailing list >> Blinux-list@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Blinux-list mailing list > Blinux-list@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list > > -- This message is subject to the CSIR's copyright terms and conditions, e-mail legal notice, and implemented Open Document Format (ODF) standard. The full disclaimer details can be found at http://www.csir.co.za/disclaimer.html. Please consider the environment before printing this email.