From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (qmail 21727 invoked from network); 14 Dec 1998 14:15:04 -0000 Received: from mail.redhat.com (199.183.24.239) by lists.redhat.com with SMTP; 14 Dec 1998 14:15:04 -0000 Received: from mail.taconic.net (root@mail.taconic.net [205.231.144.35]) by mail.redhat.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA08160 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 1998 09:06:30 -0500 Received: from darkstar.taconic.net (2ndsight@ch-asc2-p9.taconic.net [205.231.28.60]) by mail.taconic.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA04714; Mon, 14 Dec 1998 09:01:52 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 09:04:55 -0500 (EST) From: Charles Hallenbeck <2ndsight@taconic.net> Reply-To: Charles Hallenbeck <2ndsight@taconic.net> To: Richard Uhtenwoldt cc: blinux-list@redhat.com Subject: Re: the glass tty model of human-computer interaction In-Reply-To: <199812140555.VAA29035@ohio.river.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII List-Id: I have had a lot of experience with line editors dating from the late 1960s and as I think about it, it has been a very long time since I have used one. I presently use a standard word processor for writing and editing documents (I hate to admit it but I am a WordStar freak), and a full screen "visual editor" (Brief by Borland and Underware) for program preparation and editing. I think the reason line editors and the dumb terminal went together so well was the fact that one had to use the same key presses for editor commands as for data entry. That meant there needed to be a convention for switching back and forth between "edit mode" and "command mode". Even though as a blind user I perhaps cannot appreciate the expanse of the whole screen at once, there is an enormous convenience in not having to think constantly about this distinction between the two "modes". Thus while VI is a visual editor, it retains the problem of "edit mode" and "command mode" and therefore resembles an older style line editor more closely than a modern word processor. Word processors and single-mode editors are clearly more convenient than dual-mode editors, whether line or full screen oriented. Thanks for your very interesting question. BTW -- our screen review software, provox, has two modes of operation which we call "standard mode" and "enhanced mode." In the former, one needs to switch back and forth between using the keyboard for communicating with the application, or using it for reviewing the screen. The enhanced mode sets aside the numeric keypad for the exclusive use of the speech software, so that in effect it is always in review mode, while the rest of the keyboard is always in the active data entry mode. There are in effect two cursors, one controlled by the running application and one controlled by the user for screen review purposes. I had not thought before about the similarity of this modality to the question of editor design, but the similarity is striking. Chuck -- Second Sight Software Now using Linux and PINE