re: hello

re: hello

[Jude DaShiell]

Once you've paid for the doubletalk lt, you have at least two choices for 
screen readers that will run in dos.  One of them provox was written by a 
speakup list member and is free for download.  Then there's jaws for dos 
also free for download since it like provox are no longer supported. 
Provox though isopen source though.  Jaws for dos has to be searched out 
on the ftp links.  One more thing, if you have at least win2k you don't 
need win-eyes trial anything for speech.  Thunder screen reader is 
available free for download for personal home users and nvda which 
recently had an update is also available free for download and it's open 
source.  nvda is written in python and may get improved to where it can 
work with openoffice if the interest is there among the developers.

RE: hello

[Jim Grimsby Jr.]

Hi you can also use a free copy of slimware that is included in the window
bridge 2000 package www.windowbridge.ws 
It supports many hardware devices and Braille displays under dos. 
As I said it is included in the window bridge 2000 package.
Hth 

-----Original Message-----
From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
On Behalf Of Jude DaShiell
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 2:57 AM
To: speakup@braille.uwo.ca
Subject: re: hello


Once you've paid for the doubletalk lt, you have at least two choices for 
screen readers that will run in dos.  One of them provox was written by a 
speakup list member and is free for download.  Then there's jaws for dos 
also free for download since it like provox are no longer supported. 
Provox though isopen source though.  Jaws for dos has to be searched out 
on the ftp links.  One more thing, if you have at least win2k you don't 
need win-eyes trial anything for speech.  Thunder screen reader is 
available free for download for personal home users and nvda which 
recently had an update is also available free for download and it's open 
source.  nvda is written in python and may get improved to where it can 
work with openoffice if the interest is there among the developers.



_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup


-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.17/850 - Release Date: 6/15/2007
11:31 AM

RE: hello

[Sina Bahram]

Why?

Javascript, pdf, and flash all have purely accessible ways of being
accessed. PDF's especially have come a long way, flash is quickly catching
up, and javascript only causes problems during certain events where keyboard
focus is stolen away, which a lot of new frameworks have been modified not
to do. Mainly, I'm thinking of ajax and web 2.0 interfaces.

I actually think such technologies should be increased, or whatever is to
replace them. Halting progress just because certain individuals which to
keep using a console doesn't seem very practicle.

For certain activities, such as filling out forms and things of that nature:
an html equivalent to a PDF form is sometimes preferable for multiple
reasons, not just accessibility, but in the general scheme of things; it's
only getting better.

Take care,
Sina 

-----Original Message-----
From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
On Behalf Of Jude DaShiell
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 5:57 AM
To: speakup@braille.uwo.ca
Subject: re: hello

Once you've paid for the doubletalk lt, you have at least two choices for
screen readers that will run in dos.  One of them provox was written by a
speakup list member and is free for download.  Then there's jaws for dos
also free for download since it like provox are no longer supported. 
Provox though isopen source though.  Jaws for dos has to be searched out on
the ftp links.  One more thing, if you have at least win2k you don't need
win-eyes trial anything for speech.  Thunder screen reader is available free
for download for personal home users and nvda which recently had an update
is also available free for download and it's open source.  nvda is written
in python and may get improved to where it can work with openoffice if the
interest is there among the developers.



_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: hello

[Gaijin]

na Bahram wrote:
> Halting progress just because certain individuals which to keep
 > using a console doesn't seem very practicle.

     I'm not just a console user.  Nor do I mind my display being 
fiddled with to any degree, as long as it's no more than my display. 
Ever take a look at Google Analytics?  It's incredible just how much 
data they can get out of a web page.  The only problem is all that data 
can !only! be used to exploit their customers by prying open their 
wallets and getting at whatever's inside.  I can do without all the 
grifting.  HTML alone should be enough to get our money.  They certainly 
don't need to take control of my computer to spam the bejesus out of me. 
  I know what I'm looking for to buy.   I don't like having things 
shoved in my face.  It's rude and just plain wrong, and if they want to 
do business that way, I'd rather be on the side of caution and shop 
anywhere else.

         Michael

Re: hello

[Glenn Ervin]

Will this support software speech in DOS?
Glenn
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jim Grimsby Jr." <jimgrims@pacbell.net>
To: "'Speakup is a screen review system for Linux.'" 
<speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 5:16 AM
Subject: RE: hello


Hi you can also use a free copy of slimware that is included in the window
bridge 2000 package www.windowbridge.ws
It supports many hardware devices and Braille displays under dos.
As I said it is included in the window bridge 2000 package.
Hth

-----Original Message-----
From: speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca [mailto:speakup-bounces@braille.uwo.ca]
On Behalf Of Jude DaShiell
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 2:57 AM
To: speakup@braille.uwo.ca
Subject: re: hello


Once you've paid for the doubletalk lt, you have at least two choices for
screen readers that will run in dos.  One of them provox was written by a
speakup list member and is free for download.  Then there's jaws for dos
also free for download since it like provox are no longer supported.
Provox though isopen source though.  Jaws for dos has to be searched out
on the ftp links.  One more thing, if you have at least win2k you don't
need win-eyes trial anything for speech.  Thunder screen reader is
available free for download for personal home users and nvda which
recently had an update is also available free for download and it's open
source.  nvda is written in python and may get improved to where it can
work with openoffice if the interest is there among the developers.



_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup


-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.17/850 - Release Date: 6/15/2007
11:31 AM



_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

pdf, javascript, and flash was Re: hello

[C.M. Brannon]

"Sina Bahram" <sbahram@nc.rr.com> writes:

> Javascript, pdf, and flash all have purely accessible ways of being
> accessed. PDF's especially have come a long way, flash is quickly catching
> up, and javascript only causes problems during certain events where keyboard
...
> I actually think such technologies should be increased, or whatever is to


JavaScript is a bad idea.  Do you really want random people running
random code on your box?  Quite a few firewall administrators agree
with me about this, because they don't allow it.
Unfortunately, we have to live with it.

PDF has one use-case IMHO: the creation of printable documents.  I use
it quite often for this purpose.  However, storing documents in PDF is
a step backward, rather than a step forward.  Why?  PDF is *not* a
machine-readable format.  HTML, ASCII, RTF, and even Microsoft Word
are machine-readable.  This does not hold for PDF and PostScript.
Unfortunately, many people seem to use PDF for document storage, even
though it is not suited to this task.

As for Flash, I cannot say much about it.  From what I know, its
purpose is the transmission of animated movies.  I doubt those are
terribly accessible.  Regardless, sending me movies that I cannot see
is a waste of my bandwidth.  Finally, Flash is a proprietary format.
Why should I care about it?

-- Chris

Re: pdf, javascript, and flash was Re: hello

[Glenn Ervin]

I would agree with the below comments, except I try to keep in mind, that 
the more we regulate the Internet, the less freedoms we will have with it.
Glenn

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Doug Sutherland" <doug@proficio.ca>
To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 1:10 PM
Subject: Re: pdf, javascript, and flash was Re: hello


Javascript really is a bad idea as Chris stated, and so is flash.
Both can be opening connections to anywhere without your
knowledge. They are not secure, period. Many sites will not
work properly with browsers like links even though they have
javascript support.

The adobe situation is far worse. It is becoming an entirely
different platform on its own. Its almost like windows, in fact
it is competition to windows, it's a challenge to own desktop.
Look what google does, it can convert pdf to html but NOT
text, its graphical. Its a total mess. It's huge software and is
buggy.

I could go on and on about these three evil bits of software.

But fundamentally they all assume I am on a PC, also on
windows, and desktop windows. This is not my idea of
information being free. The future does not lie in PCs. It
will be portable devices. None of them handle these types
of "pages" properly. Web sites should be standardized in
such a way that they are not form fit for PCs. There are
some that support mini version pages like WAP format
but that's pretty lame. The information should be just
information, and the protocols should be standard and
generic such that ANY device or process can read them
and re-format them any way necessary. This will never
happen with javascript, flash, or pdf.

All of the above are really used because of the silly need
to make the web more like TV than information, with
all kinds of dizzying adverts, and the use of them is usually
ONLY to make the site look pretty. Wrong reasons to
diverge from the original idea, that there should be a set
of standards that are globally accessible.

I believe in accessibility beyond just for what most
people think, it should allow not only different devices
or browsers, it shoul allow different modalities. The
CONTROLS in particular should not assume that
there is keyboard and mouse. Some very serious work
needs to be done in accessibility standards, and it's
not headed in the right direction.

  -- Doug

_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: pdf, javascript, and flash was Re: hello

[Doug Sutherland]

Javascript really is a bad idea as Chris stated, and so is flash.
Both can be opening connections to anywhere without your
knowledge. They are not secure, period. Many sites will not
work properly with browsers like links even though they have
javascript support. 

The adobe situation is far worse. It is becoming an entirely 
different platform on its own. Its almost like windows, in fact
it is competition to windows, it's a challenge to own desktop.
Look what google does, it can convert pdf to html but NOT 
text, its graphical. Its a total mess. It's huge software and is
buggy.

I could go on and on about these three evil bits of software.

But fundamentally they all assume I am on a PC, also on 
windows, and desktop windows. This is not my idea of 
information being free. The future does not lie in PCs. It 
will be portable devices. None of them handle these types
of "pages" properly. Web sites should be standardized in 
such a way that they are not form fit for PCs. There are 
some that support mini version pages like WAP format
but that's pretty lame. The information should be just 
information, and the protocols should be standard and 
generic such that ANY device or process can read them
and re-format them any way necessary. This will never 
happen with javascript, flash, or pdf.

All of the above are really used because of the silly need
to make the web more like TV than information, with 
all kinds of dizzying adverts, and the use of them is usually 
ONLY to make the site look pretty. Wrong reasons to 
diverge from the original idea, that there should be a set
of standards that are globally accessible.

I believe in accessibility beyond just for what most 
people think, it should allow not only different devices
or browsers, it shoul allow different modalities. The 
CONTROLS in particular should not assume that 
there is keyboard and mouse. Some very serious work
needs to be done in accessibility standards, and it's 
not headed in the right direction.

  -- Doug

Re: pdf, javascript, and flash was Re: hello

[Michael Whapples]

While I think things like javascript, flash PDF and some other
technologies are use inappropriately, I think certain ones, thinking of
PDF in particular here, do have there place.

Extending on what I mean about PDF, if the full specifications were
followed properly, and usually this is not done, the situation regarding
PDF should be alot better than it is for us. Unfortunately, software,
both the readers and the writers don't follow this wonderfully, and for
the creating software, if it doesn't follow the specification properly
then no matter how good the reader is the output won't be good (how many
cases can you think of finding untagged PDF), but in most cases the
reader isn't realyy up to it fully either. As I understand it, PDF and
post script is aimed at printing (or the layout), so yes it can be
appropriate to post PDF on the internet if you expect the user to print
it off, but if there is expected online viewing, then there are
certainly more appropriate formats for that (I am thinking of those
scientific papers I would have found useful for my physics that were
online in PDF although mathml is more accessible).

While technology has done alot for me, I do get concerned by various
developments and if theyh are going to create more problems than they
will solve (in my case), eg.e-books and all the security they are
building in to prevent users doing anything to it, how will this impact
on my ability to convert it to a format suitable for me, javascript on
websites (particularly when not needed, sometimes even used when a link
would do the same), etc.

From
Michael Whapples
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 13:10 -0500, Doug Sutherland wrote:
> Javascript really is a bad idea as Chris stated, and so is flash.
> Both can be opening connections to anywhere without your
> knowledge. They are not secure, period. Many sites will not
> work properly with browsers like links even though they have
> javascript support. 
> 
> The adobe situation is far worse. It is becoming an entirely 
> different platform on its own. Its almost like windows, in fact
> it is competition to windows, it's a challenge to own desktop.
> Look what google does, it can convert pdf to html but NOT 
> text, its graphical. Its a total mess. It's huge software and is
> buggy.
> 
> I could go on and on about these three evil bits of software.
> 
> But fundamentally they all assume I am on a PC, also on 
> windows, and desktop windows. This is not my idea of 
> information being free. The future does not lie in PCs. It 
> will be portable devices. None of them handle these types
> of "pages" properly. Web sites should be standardized in 
> such a way that they are not form fit for PCs. There are 
> some that support mini version pages like WAP format
> but that's pretty lame. The information should be just 
> information, and the protocols should be standard and 
> generic such that ANY device or process can read them
> and re-format them any way necessary. This will never 
> happen with javascript, flash, or pdf.
> 
> All of the above are really used because of the silly need
> to make the web more like TV than information, with 
> all kinds of dizzying adverts, and the use of them is usually 
> ONLY to make the site look pretty. Wrong reasons to 
> diverge from the original idea, that there should be a set
> of standards that are globally accessible.
> 
> I believe in accessibility beyond just for what most 
> people think, it should allow not only different devices
> or browsers, it shoul allow different modalities. The 
> CONTROLS in particular should not assume that 
> there is keyboard and mouse. Some very serious work
> needs to be done in accessibility standards, and it's 
> not headed in the right direction.
> 
>   -- Doug
> 
>