[nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility, standards, and legal requirements.

Wed Mar 5 18:56:42 UTC 2014

John:

You may be correct. But I heard that Apple got an inkling they might be sued
by Massachusetts because their stuff wasn't accessible and they certainly
didn't want to give up the Massachusetts educational market. (big grin)

I'm definitely not anti-regulations. But I truly don't see how we can have
effective regulations if we can't even state what said regulations should
require and if the field keeps innovating out from under us. IMO we can't
logically have it both ways -- guaranteeing accessibility while encouraging
or at least not obstructing innovation in the larger industry.

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of John G. Heim
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 10:35 AM
To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility, standards, and
legal requirements.

Well, I predicted this would be the reaction.

But the fact is that regulations have already helped us quite a bit. For 
example, the main reason Apple developed voiceover was because they had 
to develop a screen reader in order to meet the requirements in the 508 
regulations. The University of Wisconsin was among many public 
institutions that were switching away from Apple products in  our 
libraries and labs because there was no screen reader for Mac OS. Apple 
had to develop a screen reader  or give up on that entire market.

Of course, you're probably aware of the NFB's suit against several 
universities that were going to give their students Kindle book readers 
even though they were inaccessible. When the NFB won, that put an 
enormous amount of pressure on Amazon to add a screen reader to the 
Kindle. Whether Amazon will ever respond in a positive way to that 
pressure remains to be seen. However, even if they drag their feet, it 
leaves the door open for manufactures with a  point of view more 
favorable to our needs -- like Apple for example.

Again, I'm not saying this is going to be easy. But it's not hopeless.

Anybody know who created the Twenty-First Century Communications and 
Video Accessibility Act? I get the impression that it came originally 
from the FCC itself.

On 03/05/14 12:14, Stanzel, Susan - FSA, Kansas City, MO wrote:
> Don't hold your breath about how much regulations are going to help.
>
> Susie Stanzel
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Gary Wunder
> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 12:02 PM
> To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility, standards, and
legal requirements.
>
> I think Deque Systems runs such a program.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Suzanne Germano
> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 11:24 AM
> To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility, standards, and
legal requirements.
>
> Are they any businesses out there whose sole job is to test accessibility.
> Something where a company could provide their software and user stories
and those savvy in accessibility run it through it's paces and report back.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Jim Barbour <jbar at barcore.com> wrote:
>
>> Tracy, this is an excellent usability mission statement for anyone,
>> but particularly for eyes free usability.
>>
>> The challenge is that web developers have a very hard time determining
>> if their sites meet this usability mission statement for eyes free users.
>>
>> IMHO, it is not usually feasible to expect web developers to invest
>> the time navigating web pages using a screen reader.  It's
>> uncomfortable for them, is time consuming for them, and doesn't
>> provide a lot of return on investment for them.
>>
>> Larger companies, like Google, are in a better position to set up user
>> testing, and to have a small staff of screen reader savvy folks who
>> can train others and do a very limited amount of testing.
>>
>> Doug, I'd be very curious to know how you guys recommend structuring a
>> product's development and quality control life cycle to effectively
>> take accessibility into account.
>>
>> Take Care,
>>
>> Jim
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 09:41:11AM -0500, Tracy Carcione wrote:
>>> Yes.  That's so simple, I guess I was taking it for granted and
>>> looking
>> for
>>> something more complex.
>>> If I'm running a program, or visiting a website, I want to spend as
>> little
>>> effort as possible on figuring out how to make it work.  I just want
>>> it
>> to
>>> do whatever I'm using it to do. I really hate jumping through hoops
>>> to
>> make
>>> something work.
>>> Tracy
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nicole Torcolini"
>>> <ntorcolini at wavecable.com>
>>> To: "'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'" <nfbcs at nfbnet.org>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 9:24 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility,
>>> standards,and legal requirements.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Sure. Whether or not a person has a disability, it should not a
>>>> take a
>> ton
>>>> of brain power to figure out what controls on a page do. Sometimes,
>>>> how
>> a
>>>> page is supposed to work is not even obvious to a sighted person.
>> Usually,
>>>> pages like this have accessibility problems that would be fixed or
>>>> at least slightly better if the whole "what is this thing suppose
>>>> to do" thing
>> was
>>>> fixed. Also, regardless of disability, there is the whole expected
>>>> behavior part. If you are writing in an autocomplete combobox
>>>> textfield, what should happen when you press certain keys?
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Tracy
>> Carcione
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 6:48 AM
>>>> To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
>>>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility,
>>>> standards,
>> and
>>>> legal requirements.
>>>>
>>>> Nicole, could you expand on this statement?  It sounds like an
>> interesting
>>>> perspective, but I'm not really sure what you mean.
>>>> Tracy
>>>>
>>>>> A large part of accessibility is user experience. It certainly is
>>>>> not all of it, but a large number of the problems with which I
>>>>> deal probably would not exist if the user experience part was better.
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Jim
>>>>> Barbour
>>>>> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 9:33 AM
>>>>> To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
>>>>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility,
>>>>> standards, and legal requirements.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hey Suzanne,
>>>>>
>>>>> A more germane course is probably a course on usability, sometimes
>>>>> called human computer interaction.
>>>>>
>>>>> In there, you'll see the challenges of designing and building apps
>>>>> that are usable by a large cross section of the population.  This
>>>>> includes people who speak different languages, have differing
>>>>> educational backgrounds, different physical impairments, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since it turns out to be really hard to bring all these people
>>>>> together to test your apps, app designers/developers have to come
>>>>> up with really good best practices for how to design and built
> programs.
>>>>> Often these practices do not include accessibility, but it is
>>>>> likely the right place for a discussion of it.
>>>>>
>>>>> This whole model though only works well for mature software
>>>>> development teams, and not for folks who are working on brand new
>> ideas.
>>>>>
>>>>> Good luck on your degree, Suzanne.  I like seeing more blind
>>>>> people get into this industry.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jim
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 09:28:52AM -0700, Suzanne Germano wrote:
>>>>>> In my computer science degree, we are required to take a course
>>>>>> in computing ethics. There is one chapter that touches on
>>>>>> accessibility but it isn't much. I believe from day one of
>>>>>> computer science classes the student should be taught how to make
>>>>>> the program accessible. I am legally blind and have taken several
>>>>>> programming courses yet I do not know how to ensure a piece of
>>>>>> software I develop is accessible. I know how important it is yet
>>>>>> I dont' know how to do it, so how can we expect people who don't
>>>>>> even think about it to know how to do without being taught. It
>>>>>> should be mandatory as part of all computer science
>>>>> programs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 8:47 AM, Mike Freeman <k7uij at panix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How can education teach what can't even be defined?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mike Freeman
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
>>>>>>> Nancy Coffman
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 5:40 AM
>>>>>>> To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility,
>>>>>>> standards, and legal requirements.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The education system needs to teach about accessibility. It is
>>>>>>> not fair to those who need it for accessibility to be learned
>>>>>>> as
>>>>>> on-the-job
>>>>> training.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nancy Coffman
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mar 3, 2014, at 12:30 AM, Jim Barbour <jbar at barcore.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Like I said, learn to disagree in public.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We're not talking about contracts here.  If the government
>>>>>>>> has contracted
>>>>>>> to write an app then accessibility ought to be a requirement --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> even if the department receiving the program doesn't have any
>>>>>> blind
>>>>>>> people working there. I'm sure we can agree that this is a good
>>>>>>> idea and that it's not hapening right now.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What I'm talking about are startups, or other situations
>>>>>>>> where a new app
>>>>>>> is getting  off the ground.  In the very beginnings of this
>>>>>>> apps lifecycle (a few product designers or just developers
>>>>>>> trying to build something brand new), it's not yet the right
>>>>>>> time to think hard about accessibility or security.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 08:40:48PM -0600, John G. Heim wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Well, you're just making no sense. In your world, a bank
>>>>>>>>> president goes
>>>>>>> to the programmers. He says, "How's that on-line banking app
> going?"
>>>>>>> The programmers say, "Really good. We have the ability for our
>>>>>>> customers to pay bills, transfer money from one account to
>>>>>>> another,
>>>>> check their balances.
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> only thing we can't do yet is keep hackers from getting in and
>>>>>>> stealing all their money. Other than that we are ready to go."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You know that if you want to sell a computer system to the
>>>>>>>>> Department of
>>>>>>> Defense, you have to meet certain security standards, right?
>>>>>>> why do you think that is?  Imagine a defense contractor trying
>>>>>>> to sell the Pentagon a new missile system. The contractor is
>>>>>>> like, "this missile is so fast can get anywhere in the world in
>>>>>>> two minutes and so accurate that deliver its payload to withing
>>>>>>> 2 feet of its
>> target."
>>>>>>> The Pentagon says, "Yeah, but the control system is insecure.
>>>>>>> They enemy will just take control and fire it back at us." The
>>>>>>> contractor replies, "Yeah, but look how fast and accurate it is."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 2, 2014, at 7:34 PM, Jim Barbour wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and John I think you're looking at it wrong, so you and I
>>>>>>>>>> may just have
>>>>>>> to learn to disgree in public <grin>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I would, in fact, argue that paying too much attention to
>>>>>>>>>> security
>>>>>>> concerns early in a product's design cycle can stifle innovation.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If a product can't be released as a 1.0 product unless it's
>>>>>>>>>> deamed
>>>>>>> "secure" by a security audit, that's going to be too high a bar
>>>>>>> for a lot of folks. The same question gets asked about security
>>>>>>> a lot that I'm asing about accessibility.  That is, when is the
>>>>>>> product deemed "worthy of going through a security audit"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Your kernel patch comment is interesting, but off topic.
>>>>>>>>>> I'll start a new thread asking more about that.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 07:06:46PM -0600, John G. Heim wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I think you're looking at it wrong. Would you argue that
>>>>>>>>>>> security
>>>>>>> concerns are stifling innovation with respect to on-line banking?
>>>>>>> Of course not. It's simply something that has to be there or
>>>>>>> the technology simply isn't ready to go. Accessibility is no
>>>>>>> different than other features like stability and security.
>>>>>>> Would Google have released gmail before they had security
>>>>>>> issues
> pretty well in hand?
>>>>> :Okay, here's your new email account.
>>>>>>> We don't really know how to keep people from stealing your
>>>>>>> password and reading your mail but we're working on that."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Just as companies tend to pay lip service to security
>>>>>>>>>>> issues until
>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>> get bitten by them, they don't pay attention to accessibility
>>>>>>> until they have to. The only issue is how to change tthat.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I've been struggling to get a patch into the linux kernel
>>>>>>>>>>> that makes
>>>>>>> hardware speech synthesizers work at boot time. Some of the
>>>>>>> kernel developers don't get what the big deal is. But would
>>>>>>> they release a version of the operating system that didn't have
> video at boot time?
>>>>>>> Imagine an operating system where the users had to wait until
>>>>>>> the computer started up and then type a command to get the
>>>>>>> monitor to
>>>>>> work.
>>>>> That would be insane.
>>>>>>> Nobody would say they had to put it out that way because it
>>>>>>> would take too long to fix. It just wouldn't be considered to
>>>>>>> be done until that problem was addressed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 2, 2014, at 12:51 PM, Jim Barbour wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> <note> I'm starting a new thread about this topic because
>>>>>>>>>>>> frankly I
>>>>>>> don't know if what I'm about to say applies to new versions of
>>>>>>> MS
>>>>> office.
>>>>>>>   I
>>>>>>> truly don't know if MS is innovating their user interfaces or
>>>>>>> if they're just being lazy, and would like for *that*
>>>>>>> conversation to take place on the other thread.
>>>>>>>>>>>> </note>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I was having a similar discussion about innovation with
>>>>>>>>>>>> Tim Elder
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> weekend.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It is my rather strong opinion that allowing innovation
>>>>>>>>>>>> does, pretty
>>>>>>> much by definition, require that we allow new ideas to grow and
>>>>>>> flourish before accessibility can be brought into the picture.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I would say that this applies to most areas of broad
>>>>>>>>>>>> usability
>>>>>>> requirements such as Internationalization, localization,
>>>>>>> varying color palettes, ergonomic menu placement, etc., etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> My favorite example of innovation that would have been
>>>>>>>>>>>> stopped cold
>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>> accessibility standards is the whole AJAX/web 2.0 model that
>>>>>>> Google introduced with their gmail product in 2004.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Google could not have released gmail in 2004 if they had
>>>>>>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>> required
>>>>>>> to make it accessible.  They couldn't have, even if they'd
>>>>>>> wanted to. The technology needed to make AJAX accessible, what
>>>>>>> we now call the ARIA roles, hadn't been invented yet.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> What basically had to happen was a rather long set of
>>>>>>>>>>>> conversations
>>>>>>> amongst web browser developers, screen reader developers, and
>>>>>>> web app developers to figure out how to communicate the
>>>>>>> necessary information through the necessary channels so that
>>>>>>> screen readers could get the right information at the right time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Within the general web usability community, AJAX/web 2.0
>>>>>>>>>>>> is pretty
>>>>>>> much the big step for web apps becoming truly user friendly web
>>>>>>> apps, rather than clunky, text based, app like web pages.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Therefore, it's pretty easy to argue that AJAX/web 2.0
>>>>>>>>>>>> was a very
>>>>>>> necessary usability step for the general user community,  that
>>>>>>> the blind were (sometimes still are) hurt by this usability
>>>>>>> improvement, and that screen reading technology has to catch up.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> This is pretty much the same dynamic that we've seen over
>>>>>>>>>>>> and over
>>>>>>> again.  When DOS become windows 3.0, UNIX started using
>>>>>>> X-windows and session managers, phones switched from keypads to
>>>>>>> touch screens, and probably a few examples I missed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So, where is the point at which a webapp stops being
>>>>>>>>>>>> experimental and
>>>>>>> starts being an entity that is expected to provide reasonable
>>>>>>> accomodations for disabled users?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it when you have to acknowledge license agreement or
>>>>>>>>>>>> terms of
>>>>>>> service page?  Is it when you are expected to give them a
>>>>>>> credit card number?  Is it when the site is made available to
>>>>>>> the general public, as apposed to a limited beta? I can argue
>>>>>>> for and against each of those suggestions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I do know that the Department of Justice is wrestling
>>>>>>>>>>>> with this
>>>>>>> question, along with other questions about how does a web site
>>>>>>> provider know for sure that they've made their website accessible.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm pretty sure that however the rules come down, they're
>>>>>>>>>>>> going to
>>>>>>> seriously hamper webapp providers and in turn give us relief
>>>>>>> from much of the inaccessible web content we as blind people
>>>>>>> have to deal with on a very regular basis.  I hope we keep both
>>>>>>> sides of this in mind when the DOJ developes, releases, and
>>>>>>> begins enforcing these
>>>>> regulations.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In other words, I'm hoping we can figure out a way to go
>>>>>>>>>>>> after
>>>>>>> Google,
>>>>>>> facebook, United airlines, and the US government to get their
>>>>>>> web sites more accessible; without also harassing tech
>>>>>>> startups, non-profits, and my high cusin who just put up a
>>>>>>> really cool visualization tool for how he and his friends
>>>>>>> listen to
> music.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Take Care All,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> JIm
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 12:26:25PM -0600, Gary Wunder wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear Mike:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps one of the things we need to address is whether
>>>>>>>>>>>>> or not
>>>>>>> making
>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>>>>>>>> screen reader compatible truly does limit innovation. Is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> screen
>>>>>>> reader
>>>>>>>>>>>>> technology so far behind state-of-the-art technology
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that this is
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> case,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> or are we talking about the failure to add a few lines
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of code in
>>>>>>> this new
>>>>>>>>>>>>> technology that makes it play well with the assistive
>>>>>>>>>>>>> technology we
>>>>>>> need? I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> lack the expertise to answer this question, but it seems
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to me to be
>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>> important. We go to Congress each year with the message
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> accessibility
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is easy and doable. I have never heard the software
>>>>>>>>>>>>> companies argue
>>>>>>> to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> contrary. What I do often hear from software developers
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is that it
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> too
>>>>>>>>>>>>> costly to go back and modify their legacy code but that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>> development will
>>>>>>>>>>>>> certainly incorporate accessibility. Only recently have
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I heard the
>>>>>>> idea
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that demanding accessibility threatens innovation. Can
>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone with
>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>>>>>> expertise in state-of-the-art coding and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> state-of-the-art screen
>>>>>>> reader
>>>>>>>>>>>>> technology set me straight. It seems to me that this
>>>>>>>>>>>>> argument, if
>>>>>>> true,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes where we need to place our emphasis. If it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> false, it
>>>>>>> needs
>>>>>>> to be
>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed as such. If it is true, then we need to place
>>>>>>>>>>>>> more emphasis
>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> bringing the screen readers into the second decade of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> twenty-first
>>>>>>>>>>>>> century.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of Mike
>>>>>>> Freeman
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 11:00 AM
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Office 2013: Very Much A Work In
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Progress
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gary:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I confess that I am beginning to think we're running up
>>>>>>>>>>>>> against
>>>>>>> something we
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ought to be familiar with, being Federationists, but
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we don't
>>>>>>> want to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> face. That "something" is that we, the blind, are a
> minority.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> something we're going to come up against more and more
>>>>>>>>>>>>> as the
>>>>>>> general
>>>>>>>>>>>>> universe seeks bling more than information.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I confess that I'm beginning to suspect that unless
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and/or until we
>>>>>>> come up
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with *absolutely* iron-clad legislation that, in effect,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> limits what software vendors are allowed to do to those
>>>>>>>>>>>>> things wherein we can
>>>>>>> guarantee
>>>>>>>>>>>>> accessibility -- in effect, limiting innovation  -- >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> something which
>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> obviously know won't happen -- we're going to be behind
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the eight
>>>>>>> ball even
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with vendors who claim to put accessibility first.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think more and more we will find ourselves forced to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> old,
>>>>>>> tried-and-true
>>>>>>>>>>>>> but much-forgotten and much-maligned strategies -- such
>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- gasp
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> use of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> readers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe Deborah Kent-Stein and I talked about this a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> while back
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> *she*
>>>>>>>>>>>>> thinks we'll eventually have to come round to a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> TapTapSee-like app
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> allows us to point a camera at indecipherable screens
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and have
>>>>>>> someone tell
>>>>>>>>>>>>> us what's going on. I don't think even that would work
>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>> corporations would
>>>>>>>>>>>>> frown on their networks being used for such things and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> might balk at
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> possibilities of theft of corporate secrets or
>>>>>>>>>>>>> intellectual
>>>>>>> property.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike Freeman
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of Gary
>>>>>>> Wunder
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 7:09 AM
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Office 2013: Very Much A Work In
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Progress
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I still respectfully suggest that we put Microsoft on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the agenda and
>>>>>>> try to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> find out why accessibility always seems to be at the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> bottom of their priority list. Did screen reader
>>>>>>>>>>>>> developers have a look at this
>>>>>>> before it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> came on the market? Why is it that we were still
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrestling with
>>>>>>> problems in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Outlook 2007 when Outlook 2010 hit the market? Is there
>>>>>>>>>>>>> any kind of consistency between the statement "computing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
> all"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the kind
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> release strategy we see from Microsoft?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of
>>>>>>> Elizabeth
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Campbell
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:08 AM
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Office 2013: Very Much A Work In
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Progress
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello Curtis,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am using Office 13 at home on my laptop running Windows 8.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I must
>>>>>>> confess
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that I did not have  the installation headaches as I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> purchased my
>>>>>>> system and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> software from Bestbuy. The store in my area has a very
>>>>>>>>>>>>> helpful geek
>>>>>>> squad,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and I explained that I wanted to put the computer
>>>>>>>>>>>>> through its paces
>>>>>>> using
>>>>>>>>>>>>> JAWS and so forth before I purchased it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Best Buy folks took care of all of the installations
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for me as I purchased a year of tech support for my devices.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I primarily use office 13 for Outlook and Word. I am a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> fan of
>>>>>>> outlook, so I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> was very disappointed to see that it often crashes,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> sometimes while
>>>>>>> I'm
>>>>>>>>>>>>> reading or writing a message then mysteriously restarts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> IN Word, I
>>>>>>> haven't
>>>>>>>>>>>>> used the return address features since I'm creating
>>>>>>>>>>>>> documents for
>>>>>>> use
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> home or at work, and I send 99 percent of my
>>>>>>>>>>>>> correspondences via
>>>>>>> email.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, I've had a lot of frustration accessing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> documents that are protected.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> JAWS will start reading the file and then stop. I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe what
>>>>>>> happens is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Word shuts down and then restarts because I get a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> prompt about recovering files which I can never find.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Interestingly enough, I ran in to this problem last week
>>>>>>>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>> accessing some
>>>>>>>>>>>>> documents for a Newsline seminar.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe there is a way to unprotect files, but I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> haven't found it
>>>>>>> yet.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Curtis, I agree that Office 13 is very much a work in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> progress, and
>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>> hope
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Microsoft does come out with a service pack that will
>>>>>>>>>>>>> repair these
>>>>>>> bugs
>>>>>>>>>>>>> which make it almost impossible to use Office reliably.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> At work, I an using Windows 7 and Office 2007,and I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> haven't had the
>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>>>>>>>> frustrations.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Liz Campbell
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of Curtis
>>>>>>> Chong
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 11:06 AM
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [nfbcs] Office 2013: Very Much A Work In
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Progress
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Greetings and felicitations:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Early this month, I took the rather bold step of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> upgrading from
>>>>>>> Microsoft
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office 2010 to Microsoft Office 2013. I am running the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 64-bit
>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Windows 7 Professional.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am interested in hearing from anyone out there who has
>>>>>>>>>>>>> taken a
>>>>>>> similar
>>>>>>>>>>>>> journey. Permit me to provide a brief summary of my
>>>>>>>>>>>>> experiences so
>>>>>>> far.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To begin with, the upgrade was not at all a trouble-free
>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>>>>>> first thing that Office 2013 wanted me to do was to link
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to either
>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>>>> existing or new Microsoft account. There appears no way
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to avoid
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> step.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since I had a Microsoft account (which I had never used
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for years
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> years)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I had to spend considerable time trying to get my
>>>>>>>>>>>>> password
>>>>>> back.
>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>>>>> only the first problem.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then, Office wanted to set up Sky Drive on my computer,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> which I
>>>>>>> allowed at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> first and have since removed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> After the install was finished (hours of work), I tried
>>>>>>>>>>>>> starting
>>>>>>> Word. Right
>>>>>>>>>>>>> away, I received a message (which was not spoken by JAWS
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> Windows)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> indicating that the program had stopped working. There
>>>>>>>>>>>>> seemed to be
>>>>>>> no way
>>>>>>>>>>>>> around this problem. In the end, I had to contact
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Microsoft Support
>>>>>>> over the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> telephone so that someone could remote into my computer
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and run some
>>>>>>> kind of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a repair.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> While I am now using Microsoft Office 2013 to do real
>>>>>>>>>>>>> work, I must
>>>>>>> point out
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that using this software is not without its problems.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For one thing,
>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>>>>>>>> are many situations during which JAWS goes silent and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> during which
>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>>>>>>> simply has to wait for something to happen. For another,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> there are
>>>>>>> frequent
>>>>>>>>>>>>> instances when either Word or Outlook will crash and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> then
>>>>>>> recover--all in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> complete silence (from a nonvisual access standpoint).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know about the rest of you, but one strategy
>>>>>>>>>>>>> which I often
>>>>>>> use is to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> open a master document from Windows Explorer, bringing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it into Word,
>>>>>>> then
>>>>>>>>>>>>> save the document under a different name so that I can
>>>>>>>>>>>>> work on
>>>>> it.
>>>>>>> On
>>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>>>>>> system right now, there is no way to do this anymore. As
>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon as I
>>>>>>> hit F12
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to invoke the "Save As..." dialog, Word will immediately
>> crash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Interestingly, this does not happen on the Office 2013
>>>>>>>>>>>>> system I am
>>>>>>> using at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> work. Go figure.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are two other problems worth mentioning. First, in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Word, the
>>>>>>> return
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and delivery address edit boxes in the Envelopes dialog
>>>>>>>>>>>>> are not
>>>>>>> accessible
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with any screen access program. You simply cannot read
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the text that
>>>>>>> may (or
>>>>>>>>>>>>> may not) be in these boxes. Secondly, in Outlook 2013,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Signature dialog's edit box is just as inaccessible
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to a nonvisual user as the Envelopes edit boxes in Word.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> These days, for new users, it is just about impossible
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to acquire
>>>>>>> Office
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2010. This is most unfortunate inasmuch as I consider
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2013 to
>>>>>>> be very
>>>>>>>>>>>>> much a work in progress. I very much am looking forward
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to a service
>>>>>>> pack on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> this from Microsoft.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cordially,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Curtis Chong
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your
>>>>>>>>>>>>> account info
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/batescampbel
>>>>>>> l%40
>>>>>>> c
>>>>>>> harter.n
>>>>>>>>>>>>> et
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your
>>>>>>>>>>>>> account info
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/gwunder%40ea
>>>>>>> rthl
>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>> nk.net
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your
>>>>>>>>>>>>> account info
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/k7uij%40pani
>>>>>>> x.co
>>>>>>> m
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your
>>>>>>>>>>>>> account info
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/gwunder%40ea
>>>>>>> rthl
>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>> nk.net
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your
>>>>>>>>>>>>> account info
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/jbar%40barco
>>>>>>> re.c
>>>>>>> o
>>>>>>> m
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your
>>>>>>>>>>>> account info for
>>>>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/jheim%40math
>>>>>>> .wis
>>>>>>> c
>>>>>>> .edu
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your
>>>>>>>>>>> account info for
>>>>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/jbar%40
>>>>>>>>>>> barc
>>>>>>>>>>> o
>>>>>>>>>>> re.com
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your
>>>>>>>>>> account info for
>>>>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/jheim%40math
>>>>>>> .wis
>>>>>>> c
>>>>>>> .edu
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>>>>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account
>>>>>>>>> info for
>>>>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/jbar%40ba
>>>>>>>>> rcor
>>>>>>>>> e
>>>>>>>>> .com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>>>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account
>>>>>>>> info for
>>>>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/nancy.l.coff
>>>>>>> man%
>>>>>>> 4
>>>>>>> 0gmail.c
>>>>>>> om
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account
>>>>>>> info for
>>>>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/k7uij%40pani
>>>>>>> x.co
>>>>>>> m
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account
>>>>>>> info for
>>>>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/sgermano%40a
>>>>>>> su.e
>>>>>>> d
>>>>>>> u
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>> for
>>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/jbar%40barcore
>>>>>> .com
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>> for
>>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/ntorcolini%40wa
>>>>> veca
>>>>> ble.co
>>>>> m
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>> for
>>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/carcione%40acce
>>>>> ss.n
>>>>> et
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>> for
>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/ntorcolini%40waveca
>> ble.co
>>>> m
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>> for
>>>> nfbcs:
>>>>
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/carcione%40access.n
>> et
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>> for
>> nfbcs:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/jbar%40barcore.co
>>> m
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfbcs mailing list
>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfbcs:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/sgermano%40asu.edu
>>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbcs mailing list
> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfbcs:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/gwunder%40earthlink.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbcs mailing list
> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfbcs:
>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/susan.stanzel%40kcc.usda.
gov
>
>
>
>
>
> This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely
for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this message
or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law
and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you
have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the
email immediately.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbcs mailing list
> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfbcs:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/jheim%40math.wisc.edu
>

-- 
---
John G. Heim, 608-263-4189, jheim at math.wisc.edu

_______________________________________________
nfbcs mailing list
nfbcs at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nfbcs:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/k7uij%40panix.com