Coqui TTS has blew my mind!
Linux for blind general discussion
blinux-list at redhat.com
Tue Feb 15 01:28:02 UTC 2022
what is your latest website?
On 2/10/2022 11:42 AM, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
> ..which makes stating that these are accessible incorrect.
> These samples are in fact accessible, by the w3c's guidelines, not
> mine. I stated that I have added fallback links to my own website, but
> this is not a requirement for HTML5 accessibility as defined by the
> w3c's accessibility working group, or at least not as far as I know.
> It's just something I did because I wanted to include legacy support
> for older browsers.
>> Linux exists in command line as well as gui. as someone else in a
>> different thread noted recently, they personally would not touch gui
>> again for the rest of their lives if given a choice. Meaning these
>> options are not universally available or accessible in Linux as a whole.
> The fact that text-based browsers do not support HTML5 standards makes
> them inaccessible and perhaps even unusable. There is nothing in the
> world stopping them from becoming usable by today's standards, it
> would seem that they just want to stay back in the 1990's. Music and
> video players exist in text environments, offering nearly all the
> functionality I get on a desktop. It's time for the browser to do the
> same. Still, if my phone and my desktop environment can read it
> without any issues, two out of three ain't all that bad. That said, I
> was not attempting to start a flame war, as I mentioned the fallback
> possibility as something that I do, but that the browsers I use hide
> those fallback links, so I can't say whether or not this other website
> that I did not write employs such links, which would make the samples
> available through other browsers, but again is not at all a
> requirement to meet 2022's accessibility guidelines as defined by
> people other than myself, which incidentally includes people who as
> you say use text environments as much as possible. But even those
> people must use what browsers are designed to at least try to adhere
> to those guidelines, and like it or not, even w3m does not comply with
> current HTML standards, and it's about the best text browser available.
> might as well say, please only be disabled as I personally define it,
> writing accessible by your own dictionary and seemingly to project it
> on to other people.
> Not at all my intention. I didn't define the accessibility guidelines,
> I only adhere to them to the best of my own abilities, and even took
> my website's accessibility a major step further than I needed to in
> order to accomodate the most people. How dare you put words into my
> mouth that I never said, especially since I clearly said the opposite.
> And I don't think that was the w3c's intention either.
> Why not say from the outset, that the items are only available for
> some Linux users?
> Because that would be an outright lie. Everyone who runs a Linux
> operating system has the choice to use Brave, Chromium, Google Chrome,
> Firefox and a host of other standards-compliant browsers. Just because
> you yourself made the choice not to use them does not mean that they
> are not available should you choose one of them. There are even ways
> around the whole desktop environment and screen display thing, using
> xvfb I think it's called with dummy display output and a very small
> window manager that just runs your screen reader and browser and
> otherwise stays completely out of the way. Again, it's about personal
> choice, but more about needing the ability to choose a text-mode
> browser that can handle the simplest HTML5 audio standard, and at
> and shopping without choking and either crashing or sending me to a
> blank screen or back to the login page as if my credentials were
> incorrect. The fact is that text browsers can't even handle HTML4
> correctly, as they don't know how to handle something as simple as
> headers in most cases. At the very least, keyboard header navigation
> would be a step in the right direction. But again, this is not my
> fault, nor the fault of modern website developers. This is a lack of
> standards compliance among text-mode browsers. Nothing more, nothing
> Blinux-list mailing list
> Blinux-list at redhat.com
More information about the Blinux-list