Re: Epiphany accessibility?

[Janina Sajka <janina rednote net>]

I have not tried it recently, but I can tell you that no one is using
Epiphany as their default mail uag in so far as I'm aware. Most blind
users, for example, would be using pine, mutt, or various emacs-based
uags--probably in that order.

When I did look at Epiphany I found it promissing--though I didn't
immediately see a reason to switch. In particular, I found the menus
spoke well, but message text didn't. But this information is months old.

Reinout van Schouwen writes:
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> This is my first post to this list. I want to ask your opinions about 
> the following:
> 
> How well does the default GNOME browser, Epiphany, perform 
> accessibility-wise? I have only found one post mentioning it:
> 
> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-accessibility-list/2004-April/msg00027.html
> 
> Here's a short list of Epiphany bugs with the 'accessibility' keyword set:
> 
> http://makeashorterlink.com/?J67412CD9
> 
> I am also very interested in the question how Mozilla Firefox stacks up 
> against Epiphany in this regard. Do screen reader users require 
> something like Fangs? 
> (http://www.standards-schmandards.com/index.php?2004/11/22/8-fangs-release-05)
> 
> Anxiously awaiting your replies, please cc: me personally if possible. :-)
> 
> regards,
> 
> -- 
> Reinout van Schouwen			student of Artifical Intelligence
> email: reinout cs vu nl			mobile phone: +31-6-44360778
> 
>    == Geen softwarepatenten in Europa! == www.NoSoftwarePatents.com ==
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-accessibility-list mailing list
> gnome-accessibility-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Chair
				Accessibility Workgroup
				Free Standards Group (FSG)

janina freestandards org	Phone: +1 202.494.7040