actually, Dropping 10.4 support will probably make it more accessible ultimately. There is an implication that the underlying layers upon which Firefox runs will be dependent on 10.5. Chances are, this means the low level building blocks for accessibility will be more reliable. You'd have to ask one of the developers for sure, but in the grand scheme of things, I think this hints of good things.
Joel On Feb 8, 2010, at 1:20 PM, Chris Blouch wrote: > Not that it's accessible anyway, but if they did get it working you wouldn't > be able to run it on OSX 10.4. Only OSX 10.5 or higher will be acceptable. > > http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/355360/mozilla-to-turn-its-back-on-tiger > > http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/browse_thread/thread/7d3a647586bab993# > > CB > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "MacVisionaries" group. > To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
