From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (qmail 31228 invoked from network); 14 Dec 1998 14:22:53 -0000 Received: from mail.redhat.com (199.183.24.239) by lists.redhat.com with SMTP; 14 Dec 1998 14:22:53 -0000 Received: from wlestes.uncg.edu (wlestes.uncg.edu [152.13.173.71]) by mail.redhat.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA08489 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 1998 09:14:22 -0500 From: wlestes@wlestes.uncg.edu Received: (from wlestes@localhost) by wlestes.uncg.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id KAA01672; Mon, 14 Dec 1998 10:14:28 -0500 Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 10:14:28 -0500 Message-Id: <199812141514.KAA01672@wlestes.uncg.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: wlestes.uncg.edu: wlestes set sender to wlestes@wlestes.uncg.edu using -f To: blinux-list@redhat.com In-reply-to: <3.0.3.32.19981214064401.006b0410@popmail.eznet.net> (akp@eznet.net) Subject: Re: the glass tty model of human-computer interaction References: <3.0.3.32.19981214064401.006b0410@popmail.eznet.net> List-Id: Note that Ann's response is essentially the same as one that might be given by a sighted person. The real issue is that *whatever* the interface, as a blind user, I, at least, want a way to access it. There are some tasks for which command line programs are ideal, and others for which visual/graphical interfaces are ideal. As Ann says, some tasks are better suited for line editors and others less so. > IMHO, it depends on what you're doing. If I'm going to write a long > document, like a report, then a full screen editor is what I want because > you can move about easier within it. You can go to certain pages instead of > lines and so on. > > If, on the other hand, I'm writing something short, or if I am programming > in MOO, or looking for errors in a program in MOO that I have written, then > a line editor is much easier to use. > > I guess what I am saying is that IMHO, it depends on why you're using the > editor. > > Ann P.