up-to-date text-based browser?

up-to-date text-based browser?

[Cheryl Homiak]

I just had another couple of experiences where I could look but not load
my cart and buy with either lynx (as in the cat) or links (as in the
chain). Frankly, I'm now trying  to scrape together the money and add
Microsoft windows to my repertoire.
Here is my question, straight and plain. Is anybody actually working on
developing an up-to-date text-based browser that will meet the real needs
of the internet today? Or is development in present browsers going to
include modern accessibility anytime soon? Or is our only hope in linux
for us to eventually be able to use a more up-to-date browser under gnome?
And no flames please!!! Anybody who tries to do shopping and accessing
sites day after day can't deny there's a problem here. One day you can
manage a site; the next time you go back, you can't load your cart or you
can't check out.
Don't misunderstand; I love linux; I don't want to have to add
Microsoft Windows; I
certainly don't want to have to spend all that money!!!
But the truth is:  linux as we are now able to use it is not meeting the
requirements for much of present-day Internet transaction, and I don't see
indications that it's going to do so in the near future.
This is the main reason why i don't recommend linux to a lot of my friends
who want to do shopping and lots of audio. Yeah, I say, linux is great;
 but ..... and I give them a long list of
sites they won't be able to shop or access which I happen to know my
blind friends in Microsoft Windows are able to use.If you never need to
shop, or if you
just have a few tried-and-true stores that never ever will change, i guess
it's not an issue, but for those of us who really depend on being able to
shop online it is an issue. I'm not even sure I consider this to be mostly
an accessibility issue any more. If website operations are changing that
much, and text-based linux browsers are doing nothing to keep pace, at
what point does it quit being an accessibility issue and start being a
"get with the rest of the world" mandate. It's not even exactly a 'linux"
issue per se, as it's my understanding that sighted people using the gui
in linux aren't nearly so limited. I know most of you won't like
hearing this, but I'm not overreacting. I have watched site after site I
used become inaccessible to me, and have searched google and found all
sorts of sites I want to use, only to be disappointed when i tried to fill
up my cart or maybe worse, when the cart was all full and i tried to pay
or do that final check-out.
Unless development in browsers like lynx and links broadens soon, or
unless
the browsers using the gui become highly accessible soon, it is my belief
that anybody wanting to make full use of Internet capabilities will have
no choice but to have dual systems. and for those who simply absolutely
can't afford all that a Microsoft windows system entails for a blind
person, it will mean a lot of limitation.
And I probably should have my head examined for even posting this; I know
some of you get upset if anybody even suggests that there is a problem.
but hey, I'm not the enemy!!! If I could do all or even most of what I
need to do in text-based linux browsers, I wouldn't say a thing
onlist about a
few inaccessible sites. But I'm totally frustrated with the constant
search for sites that I can actually fully use and having to choose where
I shop by what's useable rather than what I really want!!!


-- 
Cheryl

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Kirk Reiser]

Hi Cheryl:  I am working on adapting lynx to support javascript.  I
have the basic interpreter interfaced in and I have javascript open tags
loading and the like in and working.  I just need to include the
libdom support before having something I can play with running.  This
is still going to take awhile before it's ready for prime-time but it
is underway and it is a fairway along.

  Kirk
-- 

Kirk Reiser				The Computer Braille Facility
e-mail: kirk@braille.uwo.ca		University of Western Ontario
phone: (519) 661-3061

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Cheryl Homiak wrote:

> Here is my question, straight and plain. Is anybody actually working on
> developing an up-to-date text-based browser that will meet the real needs
> of the internet today? Or is development in present browsers going to
> include modern accessibility anytime soon? Or is our only hope in linux
> for us to eventually be able to use a more up-to-date browser under gnome?

That all depends on the contribution of volunteer people, and those people 
tend to work on things they need for themselves first.

> And no flames please!!! Anybody who tries to do shopping and accessing
> sites day after day can't deny there's a problem here.

Sure.  Why don't you go and fix it?  Or put another way, do you really think 
all that ranting will solve your problem for free all in a sudden?

> Don't misunderstand; I love linux; I don't want to have to add Microsoft
> Windows; I certainly don't want to have to spend all that money!!!

Yet you take Linux's zero cost for granted...

> But the truth is:  linux as we are now able to use it is not meeting the
> requirements for much of present-day Internet transaction, and I don't see
> indications that it's going to do so in the near future.

And it will stay the same for quite a while if you and your friends are just
sitting there waiting for someone else to fix things for you... for free.

> I know most of you won't like hearing this, but I'm not overreacting. I
> have watched site after site I used become inaccessible to me, and have
> searched google and found all sorts of sites I want to use, only to be
> disappointed when i tried to fill up my cart or maybe worse, when the cart
> was all full and i tried to pay or do that final check-out.

And what have YOU done to help solve this situation?  How many hours or 
years have you spent in making Linux and associated applications what they 
are today for everybody to use for free?

Come on!

If all you and your friends have to contribute is your money due to a lack
of programming skills then just pool together to have someone else paid to
fix the text browsers to your satisfaction.  I'm sure if you consider all
the money you'd collectively put on Windows licenses and Windows
accessibility software that'd make enough to hire someone to do the job
you're not able to do yourselves.  Or just invest in the required time to
learn programming.  Or if you can't bother then stick with Windows.  But
don't expect things to be served on a golden plate to you for free all the
time just because you ask for it.

Linux's free nature comes with a price.


Nicolas

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Gilles Casse]

Javascript is still a barrier today but more generally, the issues come from graphically oriented websites: e.g. no browser will tell the meaning of a picture. 
Companies must be kept again and again informed about accessibility. To reach the simplest goal: that their customers may buy their products.

Gilles

-- 
Oralux http://oralux.org

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Cheryl Homiak]

Hi KIrk and all.
This is really exciting news, even if it isn't going to happen for a
while!
frankly, lynx (the cat) is my favorite browser as far as layout and usage,
but its lack of support for javascript is a definite disadvantage. And
while links-2.1-pre(whatever) does support javascript, I have a bit more
trouble using it than lynx.
If you need any help testing I'd be glad to volunteer; I'm not just
griping and refusing to do anything; part of my frustration is that I
don't feel there's much I can do.
Thanks for the info--and believe me, any work anybody is doing on this is
not taken for granted and is very much appreciated.
Linux is such a good system in any case, and definitely a good system for
blind people in my opinion, and the price is right, so I'd hate to see us
lose out because we just can't keep up with changes in website workings.
Thanks again.


-- 
Cheryl

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Cheryl Homiak]

Excuse me, Nicolas--no don't excuse me!!!
You always write these kind of posts when this subject comes up and i
never have replied--until now.
I most certainly do not take the work others have put into linux for free
for granted--that is your own supposition, and a rather uncalled-for
one!!!
I am not a programmer.
I do help when and where I can; am always happy to help testing with
brltty for instance. Admitedly, that hasn't ever taken much of my time.
I can spend limited time on the computer; I have a severely
developmentally disabled twenty-five year-old daughter with multiple
problems who needs  most  of my time and energy. In fact, that's why I
have to do so much of my shopping online. No, not asking for pats on the
back or pity; I am glad to be able  to care for her, but she is my
priority--not linux and certainly not your opinion of what I should be
doing with my time.
Now if you want to offer to come care for her several hours a day so I can
immerse myself in programming and then try to do something about the
browser situation--well, no, even then I wouldn't do it, because it
wouldn't be the priority I should be putting first.
You'll notice I wasn't berating any particular person for not working on
this, just trying to find out whether it's realistic to believe the
browser situation will improve.
Don't judge another person's attitude when all you know of that person is
a few emails you have read. I have no wish to judge why you react so
vehemently to people expressing their needs and frustrations, but I do
know that I haven't done anything or failed to do what I could have done
so that you can characterize me as some kind of whining freeloader.

I don't know; maybe you feel you have put hard work into some things and
been taken for granted; I am truly sorry if that is the case; I think
most of us who can't do much in this area greatly appreciate the work
of those who can.

nobody needs to worry about this turning into a flame topic, because I
won't reply at all to any more comments like Nicolas's, either privately
or publicly. He has made these comments before when I posted legitimate
concerns, and it is one time too many!!!
I apologize to the rest of you, but since he chose to berate me publicly
onlist, my reply is also public. However, I will send no more such
comments whatever else may be said.
-- 
Cheryl

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Cheryl Homiak]

I'm not so much worried about needing to know the meaning of a picture if
I can find the right links to check-out. Some of this may be
picture-related but some of it isn't; the links just don't work in our
present browsers when we use them.
Thanks for the point, though; i know this can be an issue if there is
nothing but an icon to represent an action and no link.


-- 
Cheryl

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Luke Davis]

Kirk

Just out of couriocity: why add js to lynx, when you could modify and
improve upon what already exists, in links?
The latter has the added benefits of better frames and table handling, and
a few other minor things.

Luke

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Kirk Reiser wrote:

> Hi Cheryl:  I am working on adapting lynx to support javascript.  I
> have the basic interpreter interfaced in and I have javascript open tags
> loading and the like in and working.  I just need to include the
> libdom support before having something I can play with running.  This
> is still going to take awhile before it's ready for prime-time but it
> is underway and it is a fairway along.
>
>   Kirk
>

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Cheryl Homiak]

It's kind of strange--the lynx vs. links thing.
some things that don't work in lynx because of javascript (I Think) work
in links, but on the other hand, sometimes I have to look at the setup of
a site in lynx before I can even find what I am looking for in the newer
links.
But I don't care--I'll learn to use anything, work on it patiently, if it
will just make more of the sites usable than right now is the case.


-- 
Cheryl

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Jude DaShiell]

The fact lynx the cat doesn't do java is probably a security asset in
addition to whatever else it is.  popup ads are done with java and those
using lynx are protected especially from popups selling porn that bill you
if they show up on your computer no matter how you respond to their
opening.  An I-Team report will be on WBAL TV tonight about this
particular problem.

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Cheryl Homiak wrote:

> Excuse me, Nicolas--no don't excuse me!!!
> You always write these kind of posts when this subject comes up and i
> never have replied--until now.

I'm sorry I stomped on you this time, but I was hoping to reach a wider
audience as well.  This is happening too often from too many people,
especially in the non programmer camp, even in the sighted Linux community.

> I most certainly do not take the work others have put into linux for free
> for granted--that is your own supposition, and a rather uncalled-for
> one!!!

Unfortunately you depicted your own view of the browser situation on Linux
using nearly 3 pages of text.  That's probably 10 times too much for the
information you was actually looking for which could have been put in a
couple lines only.  All the rest was ranting, including the obligatory
"Windows is better" rhetoric.  Please re-read your own post and tell me if
I'm entirely wrong.

> I am not a programmer.

That's unfortunate, even if that's not your fault.  It seems that I can 
count the number of blind Linux programmers world wide on my fingers.  Don't 
be surprised if Linux accessibility is always lagging behind.

> I do help when and where I can; am always happy to help testing with
> brltty for instance. 

That's highly appreciated.

> Admitedly, that hasn't ever taken much of my time.
> I can spend limited time on the computer;

As little as you can, that's fine.  Just don't waste that precious time 
writing about "Linux browsers are so bad I must tell my friends to stay away 
from them" emails which are worthless.  That certainly won't motivate me or 
any other to rush out fixing the things you dislike. 

> You'll notice I wasn't berating any particular person for not working on
> this, just trying to find out whether it's realistic to believe the
> browser situation will improve.

You must realize, though, that a particular person needs to work on it at
some point.  This doesn't happen in a single magical swoop.

> I have no wish to judge why you react so
> vehemently to people expressing their needs and frustrations, but I do
> know that I haven't done anything or failed to do what I could have done
> so that you can characterize me as some kind of whining freeloader.

There's a subtle but important difference between expressing needs and
frustrations. You may be right in being frustrated -- I understand that.  
Being blind too I have my own set.  You should try directing those
frustrations at your local blind association or government where, for
example, action can be taken to sponsor a project to fix those browser
problems for everyone instead of giving money to selected individuals for
outrageously expensive Windows accessibility software. There it can make a
difference.

This mailing list however isn't meant for publicly venting those
frustrations in three chapters.  Or maybe I'm wrong?  If so please someone
tell me and I'll unsubscribe right away.  I too have better things to do
with my time.


Nicolas

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Luke Davis]

I would be interested in knowing, what problems you have using links the
chain?


On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Cheryl Homiak wrote:

> Hi KIrk and all.
> This is really exciting news, even if it isn't going to happen for a
> while!
> frankly, lynx (the cat) is my favorite browser as far as layout and usage,
> but its lack of support for javascript is a definite disadvantage. And
> while links-2.1-pre(whatever) does support javascript, I have a bit more
> trouble using it than lynx.
> If you need any help testing I'd be glad to volunteer; I'm not just
> griping and refusing to do anything; part of my frustration is that I
> don't feel there's much I can do.
> Thanks for the info--and believe me, any work anybody is doing on this is
> not taken for granted and is very much appreciated.
> Linux is such a good system in any case, and definitely a good system for
> blind people in my opinion, and the price is right, so I'd hate to see us
> lose out because we just can't keep up with changes in website workings.
> Thanks again.
>
>
>

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Shaun Oliver]

at the risk of being helpful, Nicolas Pitre delivered up the following on Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 08:34:01PM -0500, 
> On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Cheryl Homiak wrote:
> 
> > Excuse me, Nicolas--no don't excuse me!!!
> > You always write these kind of posts when this subject comes up and i
> > never have replied--until now.
> 
> I'm sorry I stomped on you this time, but I was hoping to reach a wider
> audience as well.  This is happening too often from too many people,
> especially in the non programmer camp, even in the sighted Linux community.
> 
> > I most certainly do not take the work others have put into linux for free
> > for granted--that is your own supposition, and a rather uncalled-for
> > one!!!
> 
> Unfortunately you depicted your own view of the browser situation on Linux
> using nearly 3 pages of text.  That's probably 10 times too much for the
> information you was actually looking for which could have been put in a
> couple lines only.  All the rest was ranting, including the obligatory
> "Windows is better" rhetoric.  Please re-read your own post and tell me if
> I'm entirely wrong.
*SNIP*
this is the very reason I nowa days refrain from responding to such
posts as the one that first spawned this flame war.
I've seen someone who for reasons stated a few posts back is unable to
learn programming and that's fine with me, I ain't in a particularly
good position to go out and learn it either. my studies preclude me from
doing this.
I'm sick of personal attacks just because someone knows more than
another and quite frankly posts from nicolas are tiresum.
nicolas you started a similar flame war about speakup being user space.
if you're not happy with what you're reading, piss off and go create
what u want. don't piss on others just because they don't have the time
to do what you do.
sheril was kind enough along with a few others to try to assist me with
a problem I was having with lynx earlier this week and I thank her and
luke for this and others that have contributed to helping me resolve
this issue. so as you can appreciate I won't stand for the venimous
crap you spu forth in your emails. consider yourself on my blacklist. I
don't need to read this shit.



-- 
Shaun Oliver
"Becareful of the toes u step on today, they maybe connected to the ass you have to kiss tomorrow!"

EMAIL: shaun_oliver@optusnet.com.au
ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO: blindman01_2000
MSN: blindman_2001@hotmail.com
AIM: captain nemo 200
IRC: irc.awesomechat.net:6666
IRCNICK: blindman
CHANNELS: #awesomeradio #mircpopup-magic #linux #help #ourworld #audiofile #mauisun

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Kirk Reiser]

Luke Davis <ldavis@shellworld.net> writes:

> Just out of couriocity: why add js to lynx, when you could modify and
> improve upon what already exists, in links?
> The latter has the added benefits of better frames and table handling, and
> a few other minor things.

That's a valid question.  I thought about working on links but there
seems to be about three different flavours of the package under
development which turned me off.  The truer reason is though that I
like lynx the cat and don't care much for links the chain.

  Kirk
 
-- 

Kirk Reiser				The Computer Braille Facility
e-mail: kirk@braille.uwo.ca		University of Western Ontario
phone: (519) 661-3061

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Kenny Hitt]

Hi.  I'm not Kirk, but I can give a few reasons for his choice.

Links 2.1 and elinks are based on a browser called links.  The origional
links is at version 0,.98.  It was written by the developer for his own
use.  It doesn't have several important features because the author
doesn't want them.  When the current elinks developer got fed up with
the links 0.9 developer not excepting his patches he started elinks.  He
He cleaned up the code and started making it into a full featured browser.
Elinks will have java script support some day, but it hasn't been
added yet.

The creater of links2.1 just added java script support to the links 0.9
browser.  He doesn't answer questions about how the code works and isn't
doing much with it lately.  Links 2.1 uses a java script interpreter
written just for links.  If you want to fix problems with it, you will
have to first understand the code.  That's not an easy job.  The code is
disorganized.  Lots of the comments explaining it are written in Check.
Since the autors don't answer questions, you will have to translate them
yourself.  Once you do that, you will have to still try to understand
the code.  Before I looked at links 0.9 and links 2.1 source code, I
didn't know that C had a goto statement.  The links 0.9 and links 2.1
code use lots of them.

Some of the problems with links 2.1 and web sights aren't because of the
java script interpreter but because the links 0.9 browser doesn't
handle cookies or http authorization.  Elinks has already fixed those
problems, but it still doesn't have the java script support yet.

          Kenny
	  
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 06:17:31PM -0600, Luke Davis wrote:
> Kirk
> 
> Just out of couriocity: why add js to lynx, when you could modify and
> improve upon what already exists, in links?
> The latter has the added benefits of better frames and table handling, and
> a few other minor things.
> 
> Luke
> 
> On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Kirk Reiser wrote:
> 
> > Hi Cheryl:  I am working on adapting lynx to support javascript.  I
> > have the basic interpreter interfaced in and I have javascript open tags
> > loading and the like in and working.  I just need to include the
> > libdom support before having something I can play with running.  This
> > is still going to take awhile before it's ready for prime-time but it
> > is underway and it is a fairway along.
> >
> >   Kirk
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Blinux-list mailing list
> Blinux-list@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Mario Lang]

Cheryl Homiak <chomiak@chartermi.net> writes:

> I just had another couple of experiences where I could look but not load
> my cart and buy with either lynx (as in the cat) or links (as in the
> chain). Frankly, I'm now trying  to scrape together the money and add
> Microsoft windows to my repertoire.
> Here is my question, straight and plain. Is anybody actually working on
> developing an up-to-date text-based browser that will meet the real needs
> of the internet today? Or is development in present browsers going to
> include modern accessibility anytime soon?

I think the second road will be faster.  I was able
to read parts of a webpage in Mozilla using Gnopernicus
the first time two days ago or so.  It is far from a perrfect
solution yet, but at least we are getting somewhere. (I was using
gnopernicus 0.7.1 and mozilla 1.5).

text-based browsers simply do have too less developer attention
to be anywhere near completeness.  And this will probably not change in the
future.  All the serious hackers working at web-browsers are
working on Mozilla or derivates of it these days.

Besides, not every shopping site is unusable with a text
browser.  True, most are, but there are exceptions, which demonstrate
that it is not a fault of your browser, rather a fault of an incompetent
web-master team on the companies side.  For instance, the german
book and cd site amazon.de works perfectly with a standard lynx.
paypal.com also does work fine with lynx.

-- 
CYa,
  Mario | Debian Developer <URL:http://debian.org/>
        | Get my public key via finger mlang@db.debian.org
        | 1024D/7FC1A0854909BCCDBE6C102DDFFC022A6B113E44

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Shaun Oliver wrote:

> nicolas you started a similar flame war about speakup being user space. if
> you're not happy with what you're reading, piss off and go create what u
> want.

The only person who understood and accepted what I was saying about Speakup
was Kirk Reiser the very author of Speakup.  A respectful discussion ensued.  
Check back the list archive if you don't remember.  All the other people
involved in that discussion were pissing in the wind because of an
infortunate lack of clueful understanding of the underlying issue.

> don't piss on others just because they don't have the time to do what you
> do.

So I should accept being pissed on by others without a word just because
they don't have what they want for free and can't help themselves?  If you
can help others that's fine and productive.  Complaints about volunteer work
are useless.

> sheril was kind enough along with a few others to try to assist me with
> a problem I was having with lynx earlier this week and I thank her and
> luke for this and others that have contributed to helping me resolve
> this issue. 

Did I say anything against that?  Please think straight.

> so as you can appreciate I won't stand for the venimous
> crap you spu forth in your emails. consider yourself on my blacklist. I
> don't need to read this shit.

Don't bother -- I now have the answer I needed.  I'm unsubscribing from this
list right away.  May as well reconsider if my contributions to you all are 
worth this...


Nicolas

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Cheryl Homiak]

Isn't it odd how we have all of these browsers--lynx the cat, lynx the
chain, and elinks--each of them having some excellent features but none of
them complete enough to do the job?! And not meaning to leave anybody out,
I know there are other browsers like w3, edbrowse, and more. Unfortunately
there's no way to easily combine them or we maybe really could have one
really fine browser!!! As it is, I have several browsers on my system, and
use them all in turn when trying to use a site. but sometimes one browser
will let me do everything but check out, the next won't let me fill my
cart, and another won't even let me look at items. so maybe i've spent an
hour or two trying to work a site, usually not having time to do this at
one sitting, and that would be only mildly frustrating except that I so
often come away with nothing to show for my efforts.
If all these people who are working on browsers would work together we
might have a lot of progress very soon, but I do realize there are a lot
of reasons why that isn't going to happen.

-- 
Cheryl

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Cheryl Homiak]

Yes, the progress with gnopernicus is encouraging, although I think it
will be some time before we can actually use mozilla on a regular basis.
And I'm afraid I don't know enough about that browser to know what
issues there may be with using it, if any.
As to whose "fault" it is, we can argue, perhaps correctly,  that it is
the "fault" of the web designers, but if so, it is the fault of the
majority of the website designers and I frankly think the tide has gone
too far to change back for the most part.
I had a two-year running dialog, for instance, with schwans about their
website when it changed from being accessible under lynx to inaccessible,
and the only thing that finally resolved that was that it can be used with
links the chain.

-- 
Cheryl

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Mario Lang]

Cheryl Homiak <chomiak@chartermi.net> writes:

> Yes, the progress with gnopernicus is encouraging, although I think it
> will be some time before we can actually use mozilla on a regular basis.

Well, given your original request, every type of solution would probably
need some time to fully emerge.

> And I'm afraid I don't know enough about that browser to know what
> issues there may be with using it, if any.

Mozilla is the most widespread browser on the Linux platform, given that
some derivates exist whcih just use the underlying rendering engine.
I think there could be no better target then to use the same tools as most of
the others do, since this seems to ensure progressive development of
the tools.  Now that the underlying accessibility infrastructure is in
place for the Linux desktop, we can work on improving on what we
currently got, and demonstrate that the open source spirit can really
make a difference when it comes to being able to scratch ones own itches.

We should try to use the same tools as others do to benefit from overall
development in the community.  To insist on using a text-based browser
for doing modern web-activity is very likely to be a dead end, unless
we really find someone brave (and insane) enough to maintain a text-based
browser which supports the current (and future) web standards.  It does sound
very unlikely though, since  this is really a major piece of work, nothing one
man can do in his spare time...

> As to whose "fault" it is, we can argue, perhaps correctly,  that it is
> the "fault" of the web designers, but if so, it is the fault of the
> majority of the website designers and I frankly think the tide has gone
> too far to change back for the most part.

I agree.  However, it would not be the first time (especially on the Internet)
that we observe that the Masses can very well kill any (supposed to be) 
common sense.

-- 
CYa,
  Mario | Debian Developer <URL:http://debian.org/>
        | Get my public key via finger mlang@db.debian.org
        | 1024D/7FC1A0854909BCCDBE6C102DDFFC022A6B113E44

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Jude DaShiell]

Perhaps running multiple browsers might be possible using pipes.  The
trick would be to only go out to the internet with the last browser.
Probably multiple instances of a shell would have to be run for each
instance of each piped browser so if this would work at all it's not
something for low memory machines.

abbandon text-based browsers was up-to-date text-based browser?

[cstrobel]

	Might it be possible to hook Mozilla from a text-based
Screenreader such as Speakup?  JFW appearantly builds a buffer of its
rendering of what it thinks IE is showing the user.  If the output of
Mozilla can be sent to a text based program that pretends to be X
windows,  I can't think of the name of the program at the minute.  The
user wouldn't need X running.  Now Speakup hooks into Mozilla.  
	If this intermediate step can be solved, people don't need to
write text-based browsers.
	I'm not sure I explained that well, but it could be a workable
idea.
  

On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Mario Lang wrote:

> Cheryl Homiak <chomiak@chartermi.net> writes:
> 
> > Yes, the progress with gnopernicus is encouraging, although I think it
> > will be some time before we can actually use mozilla on a regular basis.
> 
> Well, given your original request, every type of solution would probably
> need some time to fully emerge.
> 
> > And I'm afraid I don't know enough about that browser to know what
> > issues there may be with using it, if any.
> 
> Mozilla is the most widespread browser on the Linux platform, given that
> some derivates exist whcih just use the underlying rendering engine.
> I think there could be no better target then to use the same tools as most of
> the others do, since this seems to ensure progressive development of
> the tools.  Now that the underlying accessibility infrastructure is in
> place for the Linux desktop, we can work on improving on what we
> currently got, and demonstrate that the open source spirit can really
> make a difference when it comes to being able to scratch ones own itches.
> 
> We should try to use the same tools as others do to benefit from overall
> development in the community.  To insist on using a text-based browser
> for doing modern web-activity is very likely to be a dead end, unless
> we really find someone brave (and insane) enough to maintain a text-based
> browser which supports the current (and future) web standards.  It does sound
> very unlikely though, since  this is really a major piece of work, nothing one
> man can do in his spare time...
> 
> > As to whose "fault" it is, we can argue, perhaps correctly,  that it is
> > the "fault" of the web designers, but if so, it is the fault of the
> > majority of the website designers and I frankly think the tide has gone
> > too far to change back for the most part.
> 
> I agree.  However, it would not be the first time (especially on the Internet)
> that we observe that the Masses can very well kill any (supposed to be) 
> common sense.
> 
> -- 
> CYa,
>   Mario | Debian Developer <URL:http://debian.org/>
>         | Get my public key via finger mlang@db.debian.org
>         | 1024D/7FC1A0854909BCCDBE6C102DDFFC022A6B113E44
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Blinux-list mailing list
> Blinux-list@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
> 

RE: abbandon text-based browsers was up-to-date text-based browser?

[Travis Roth]

Interesting idea but I don't know how one would get text applications to
run under Gnome.
Mozilla only works under a graphical user interface to the best of my
knowledge.
I hope Gnopernicus can take care of a lot of these issues, I know some
text-only users might
not like it but at least we'd have a solution when it is required.
Things will get better with time; be patient all.


**  Travis Roth
www.TravisRoth.com
travis@travisroth.com
 

-----Original Message-----
From: blinux-list-admin@redhat.com [mailto:blinux-list-admin@redhat.com]
On Behalf Of cstrobel@crosslink.net
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 9:26 PM
To: blinux-list@redhat.com
Subject: abbandon text-based browsers was up-to-date text-based browser?


	Might it be possible to hook Mozilla from a text-based
Screenreader such as Speakup?  JFW appearantly builds a buffer of its
rendering of what it thinks IE is showing the user.  If the output of
Mozilla can be sent to a text based program that pretends to be X
windows,  I can't think of the name of the program at the minute.  The
user wouldn't need X running.  Now Speakup hooks into Mozilla.  
	If this intermediate step can be solved, people don't need to
write text-based browsers.
	I'm not sure I explained that well, but it could be a workable
idea.
  

On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Mario Lang wrote:

> Cheryl Homiak <chomiak@chartermi.net> writes:
> 
> > Yes, the progress with gnopernicus is encouraging, although I think 
> > it will be some time before we can actually use mozilla on a regular

> > basis.
> 
> Well, given your original request, every type of solution would 
> probably need some time to fully emerge.
> 
> > And I'm afraid I don't know enough about that browser to know what 
> > issues there may be with using it, if any.
> 
> Mozilla is the most widespread browser on the Linux platform, given 
> that some derivates exist whcih just use the underlying rendering 
> engine. I think there could be no better target then to use the same 
> tools as most of the others do, since this seems to ensure progressive

> development of the tools.  Now that the underlying accessibility 
> infrastructure is in place for the Linux desktop, we can work on 
> improving on what we currently got, and demonstrate that the open 
> source spirit can really make a difference when it comes to being able

> to scratch ones own itches.
> 
> We should try to use the same tools as others do to benefit from 
> overall development in the community.  To insist on using a text-based

> browser for doing modern web-activity is very likely to be a dead end,

> unless we really find someone brave (and insane) enough to maintain a 
> text-based browser which supports the current (and future) web 
> standards.  It does sound very unlikely though, since  this is really 
> a major piece of work, nothing one man can do in his spare time...
> 
> > As to whose "fault" it is, we can argue, perhaps correctly,  that it

> > is the "fault" of the web designers, but if so, it is the fault of 
> > the majority of the website designers and I frankly think the tide 
> > has gone too far to change back for the most part.
> 
> I agree.  However, it would not be the first time (especially on the 
> Internet) that we observe that the Masses can very well kill any 
> (supposed to be) common sense.
> 
> --
> CYa,
>   Mario | Debian Developer <URL:http://debian.org/>
>         | Get my public key via finger mlang@db.debian.org
>         | 1024D/7FC1A0854909BCCDBE6C102DDFFC022A6B113E44
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Blinux-list mailing list
> Blinux-list@redhat.com 
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list
> 


_______________________________________________
Blinux-list mailing list
Blinux-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Chris Anderson]

At 14:32 2003-11-04 -0600,  Cheryl Homiak <chomiak@chartermi.net> wrote:

<sundry stuff and replies snipped>

Dear Cheryl, before you rush out and buy Chairman Bill's latest horrors, just
a few points. My daily business is supporting blind users in their battle to
cope with the joys of computing.  They mainly use Windows 98, XP, 2000 etc etc
with Jaws, WinEyes etc etc. They all have the same problems with Web
Shopping sites.
You, personally,  are actually a very sophisticated user, you are already
doing things that
many cannot do at all.

My Boss, who is a guru, cannot use our local Internet Banking as it is all
Java driven and very graphic.

Notice the difference between Javascript, which has been under discussion,
and Full Java with encrypted threads.
We have not mentioned the COM and Xactive stuff, which are the real culprits
in non-accessability.
No text based browsers handle this at all, and in fact graphics browsers are
not all that great either after
all the pop-ups and scripting have been removed (to counter the nasty little
hackers and intruders).

The current 1b service pack removes the MS java machine from XP (yes you can
download the Sun version
but it has many bugs when used in an MS environment). So M$ are now
undertaking a rewrite of "The Web"
as they see it. To hell with standards and existing users. My prediction is
that in four years very
few non-MS browsers will be able to see MS-driven sites. I may be wrong. But
I am often right.
Usually for the wrong reasons B>)

Before we all rush out and throw the baby out with the bathwater, or our
computer toys out
of the cot, do a little "try before buy". If you find any blind or partially
sighted people
uing M$ products who tell you they  can browse any site on the web, and are
totally happy with their
systems, then you know that they will lie about other things as well B>).

If you find an MS based product set that does all the things you want to do
seamlessly and well, then please let us all
know about it at once.

IBM and many of the mainline web solution vendors are still plugging away on
the Java train.

The accessability problem is not going to go away, there are no quick fixes.
Yes it is frustrating, but cast your mind
back five years and see  how far we have come.

You have vocally expressed a real need in our community. And I see the signs
that the penny has
dropped in the right quarters. The ripples are spreading. The only benefit
of lists such as this is
in being able to air such opinions. You will receive both  negative and
positive feedback. But this is how
progress is made. 

Cheers. Keep up the good work all. B>)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Anderson                       email:  chris@magnacarta.co.za 
Cinderella Speech Project	
http://www.magnacarta.co.za   Vision is merely a state of mind
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Cheryl Homiak]

Wow!!! I really appreciate Gary's perspective re: this.
I especially appreciated the reminders that:
(1) no system is going to solve all of our problems--and blind people
aren't the only ones that have website problems;
(2) all of us on this list want linux to succeed;
(3) we need to make use of whatever tools are necessary and we may not all
need all the same tools (I'd probably not have any problems with linux if
I didn't have to do a lot of shopping online for instance); I love being
able to play with my system in linux and compile my own kernel, etc.;
and
(4) both the positive feedback and the criticism are necessary to keep
linux developing.
Just my summary of what I got from this, but I certainly did appreciate
it.
Thanks!!!

-- 
Cheryl

up-to-date text-based browser?

[Gary Wynn]

Thank you Cheryl, for having the courage to state your experiences
clearly and in sufficient detail to help many persons who are blind,
and hoping to use linux for access.  Too often, the kind of information
you gave is not available, or suppressed.

It is vital for the health of linux development that frustrations and
shortcomings be equally well expressed.  A problem not acknowledged is
not likely to be addressed.  In terms of "marketing" linux or
recruiting persons who are blind into using linux, a forthright
admission of the problems as well as the advantages is critical.  If
persons are drawn to linux, and find they invested valuable time and
effort with a diminished return, they are often lost to linux for a
long time after the experience.

The Blinux FAQ does well at spelling out the advantages and
opportunities of linux to a person who is blind, but it cannot be
everything in one document.  Additional individual experiences with
linux are so valuable at a people-to-people level for making a good
decision.  

Because so many on this list work with linux exclusively, they may not
have access to alternative information that could assist development of
better tools.  One fact is that websites are often hostile and
difficult to use, even for non disabled persons using M$ products.  My
wife is a computer user of 20 years experience, and a GUI user for more
than 15 years.  She finds many websites extremely difficult to use with
M$ "Exploiter", simply because they are apparently not designed well
for human use.  It is doubtful that any development of a linux tool, no
matter with what genius, can correct the deficiencies of poor design on
the part of the website creators.

The final point is, that linux is a tool, and it should certainly make
sense to anyone who cooks, that not every tool can solve every problem. 
It may just be, that for many people linux is excellent for email, as
it protects well against viruses and spam, but is less adequate for web
browsing, accessing music on the net, or for handling personal
information.  One should *always* be open to using the tools that
individually, work best for oneself.  

A word to the developers of linux tools--the elk are only as healthy as
the wolves in the area.   Every linux developer *NEEDS* some very
predatory consumers who will rip apart any creation with ferocity and
persistence.  There is simply no way for linux to improve without open
expression of consumer experiences--including frustrations with its
performance.  That function *should* be regarded as a valuable service.
 M$ pays people to get far less useful information.   As a human
factors designer myself, I know that I can never make an improvement in
any human interface without an articulate human being who will take the
time to work with an interface as thoroughly as Cheryl shows she does,
and express those experiences as well as Cheryl can.   With that kind
of data, one can understand the best direction and priority for further
effort.

It is completely natural for the elk to drive away the wolves, as being
torn apart is no fun, but if the elk are too successful, they sicken
and die, and ultimately destroy themselves.  Too many fine people have
expressed views on this list like those of Cheryl, and have been
flamed--and never returned.  Linux is only as healthy an operating
system as the creators ability to accept criticism and absorb user
experiences into the design of future contributions.

We all want linux to succeed, or we would not be on this list.  The
health of this list requires we maintain as balanced a perspective as
we can--we welcome the wolves to the list as thoroughly as we do to
Yellowstone, and hope for a similar result.

Re: up-to-date text-based browser?

[Cheryl Homiak]

Hi Karl and all.
I laughed and laughed when you said that only a professional programmer
would jump through all those hoops--because I was just saying that as I
got to that sentence in your post!!!
Hey, if I ever come into that kind of money, I'll help sponsor you--but
don't hold your breath!!!
That is, I suppose, one of linux's great strengths and problems at the
same time--you can use it free but consequently who is going to pay you to
work on it fulltime?
Thanks.



-- 
Cheryl

up-to-date text-based browser?

[Karl Dahlke]

Sadly, you're right.

I am the author of edbrowse, another text based browser.
http://www.eklhad.net/linux/app/
I use this to shop online, and sometimes it works.
But sometimes it doesn't.
Sometimes I pull back and read the html source,
read the javascript,
figure out what it is trying to do,
adjust the html accordingly,
rebrowse the page,
and run it,
and then it works.
But come on; only a professional programmer could jump through
those hoops!

I probably have the necessary skills to make
edbrowse a fully functional browser.
I'd have to port it to C first, then call upon the native Java interpreter,
with all sorts of patches for the "usual" document classes etc.
Ok, but we're talking a couple years of fulltime work,
and I don't see anybody ready to pay me six figures to do that.
So - it ain't gonna happen.

I hear lynx is making a real effort at supporting javascript, but I don't know
much about that, as I dislike lynx simply for its user interface.

My approach for now, and for the foreseeable future, is, unfortunately,
to use edbrowse for most of what I do,
and ask my wife, on her Windows box,
to manage the sites that just won't behave for me.

Karl

P.S. One last thought.  The other day I got one of those stupid
spam messages, about refinancing or growing my organ or whatever,
and it had an opt-out button, which I happily pushed,
but it led me to a web based unsubscribe form with so much javascript
that even I couldn't figure it out.
Some kind of runtime decryption program.
So I can't even unsubscribe from this crap,
nor can I complain to anybody, because, after all,
the email does have an opt-out button.

P.P.S. Perhaps the best approach is to get a grant from HHS or Labor,
to make one or all of these browsers more universal.
I happen to have, bookmarked, for other reasons,
the HHS grant site;
maybe I'll whip up a business plan and submit it.
I mean, it couldn't hurt, eh??
If I had grant money coming in, and could drop my 9 to 5 job,
I could do it.