Comment 1 by briang1 on 2012-05-30 16:27
Where is this word viewer? I've never seen this software.

I know about Windows document and Fax viewer, and this will not work as the document is displayed as a bitmap.
I'm using Windows XP You could always use Jarte to open Word files, which I often do for quick and easy editing, though you might need some Microsoft file converters for some of the newer formats. Or you could use one of the Open Office programs to do it.

Word Viewer is the only program I found so far to view files in read only mode which is essential for the machine I'm administering for my blind uncle. Any other editors will ask if the file is to be saved if alphanumeric key is pressed while viewing displaying a dialog box which confuses the user.

The link to the program is here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-US/download/details.aspx?id=4

I confirm the problem on Windows 7. nvda 2013.3. Will check the newest version now.

If I recall correctly, Word Viewer doesn't include/allow access to the API which NVDA needs in order to access document content. Thus, there is no way we can make this accessible. @michaelDCurran, is this definitely the case or does this need re-testing?

Never hurts to test again.

Certainly something like createObject word.application would never work,
but I don't think we do that kind of thing anymore.

On 15/02/2016 8:06 AM, James Teh wrote:

If I recall correctly, Word Viewer doesn't include/allow access to the
API which NVDA needs in order to access document content. Thus, there
is no way we can make this accessible. @michaelDCurran
https://github.com/MichaelDCurran, is this definitely the case or
does this need re-testing?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#2399 (comment).

Michael Curran
Executive Director, NV Access Limited
Phone: +61 7 3149 3306
Website: http://www.nvaccess.org/
Twitter: @nvaccess
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/NVAccess

According to Wikipedia, Word Viewer is discontinued and download will be unavailable in November 2017.

Closing because of reasoning in #2399 (comment)