blind friendly or people friendly

blind friendly or people friendly

[Charles Hallenbeck]

All the recent posts about how to configure outlook express to be
"blind friendly" is a little troubling to me. It seems to me that
the issue is bigger than that. There are industry standards, and
there are Microsoft standards, and often the problem comes
because the two are not the same. One way to resolve the problem
is for everyone, blind or otherwise, to use outlook express and
thus use Microsoft standards everywhere. But the world is larger
than Microsoft, and many of us who use Linux follow the industry
standard - e.g., plain text for email, iso8859-1 for a standard
western character set, and the like.

Another way to resolve the problem is for users of outlook
express, blind or otherwise, to configure their software to
adhere to industry standards rather than Microsoft standards. I
think that is very different from being "blind friendly"... It is
being "people friendly".

Grumpily - Chuck


Visit me now at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (59% of Full)

Re: blind friendly or people friendly

[David Poehlman]

I agree.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Hallenbeck" <hallenbeck@valstar.net>
To: "Speakup Distribution List" <speakup@speech.braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 1:27 PM
Subject: blind friendly or people friendly


All the recent posts about how to configure outlook express to be
"blind friendly" is a little troubling to me. It seems to me that
the issue is bigger than that. There are industry standards, and
there are Microsoft standards, and often the problem comes
because the two are not the same. One way to resolve the problem
is for everyone, blind or otherwise, to use outlook express and
thus use Microsoft standards everywhere. But the world is larger
than Microsoft, and many of us who use Linux follow the industry
standard - e.g., plain text for email, iso8859-1 for a standard
western character set, and the like.

Another way to resolve the problem is for users of outlook
express, blind or otherwise, to configure their software to
adhere to industry standards rather than Microsoft standards. I
think that is very different from being "blind friendly"... It is
being "people friendly".

Grumpily - Chuck


Visit me now at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
The Moon is Waning Gibbous (59% of Full)


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

Re: blind friendly or people friendly

[Dave Hunt]

In principal, I agree.  However, to many, my employers included, 
Microsoft is the industry.  

-Dave

On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, David Poehlman wrote:

> I agree.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Charles Hallenbeck" <hallenbeck@valstar.net>
> To: "Speakup Distribution List" <speakup@speech.braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 1:27 PM
> Subject: blind friendly or people friendly
> 
> 
> All the recent posts about how to configure outlook express to be
> "blind friendly" is a little troubling to me. It seems to me that
> the issue is bigger than that. There are industry standards, and
> there are Microsoft standards, and often the problem comes
> because the two are not the same. One way to resolve the problem
> is for everyone, blind or otherwise, to use outlook express and
> thus use Microsoft standards everywhere. But the world is larger
> than Microsoft, and many of us who use Linux follow the industry
> standard - e.g., plain text for email, iso8859-1 for a standard
> western character set, and the like.
> 
> Another way to resolve the problem is for users of outlook
> express, blind or otherwise, to configure their software to
> adhere to industry standards rather than Microsoft standards. I
> think that is very different from being "blind friendly"... It is
> being "people friendly".
> 
> Grumpily - Chuck
> 
> 
> Visit me now at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> The Moon is Waning Gibbous (59% of Full)
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: blind friendly or people friendly

[David Poehlman]

but they allow you to be conformant so why not?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Hunt" <wx1g@mediaone.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Cc: "Speakup Distribution List" <speakup@speech.braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 1:42 PM
Subject: Re: blind friendly or people friendly


In principal, I agree.  However, to many, my employers included,
Microsoft is the industry.

-Dave

On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, David Poehlman wrote:

> I agree.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Charles Hallenbeck" <hallenbeck@valstar.net>
> To: "Speakup Distribution List" <speakup@speech.braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 1:27 PM
> Subject: blind friendly or people friendly
>
>
> All the recent posts about how to configure outlook express to be
> "blind friendly" is a little troubling to me. It seems to me that
> the issue is bigger than that. There are industry standards, and
> there are Microsoft standards, and often the problem comes
> because the two are not the same. One way to resolve the problem
> is for everyone, blind or otherwise, to use outlook express and
> thus use Microsoft standards everywhere. But the world is larger
> than Microsoft, and many of us who use Linux follow the industry
> standard - e.g., plain text for email, iso8859-1 for a standard
> western character set, and the like.
>
> Another way to resolve the problem is for users of outlook
> express, blind or otherwise, to configure their software to
> adhere to industry standards rather than Microsoft standards. I
> think that is very different from being "blind friendly"... It is
> being "people friendly".
>
> Grumpily - Chuck
>
>
> Visit me now at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> The Moon is Waning Gibbous (59% of Full)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>


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

Re: blind friendly or people friendly

[Dave Hunt]

As long as I don't use Linux on company time, they leave me alone:).

On 
Sun, 3 Feb 2002, David Poehlman wrote:

> but they allow you to be conformant so why not?
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave Hunt" <wx1g@mediaone.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Cc: "Speakup Distribution List" <speakup@speech.braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 1:42 PM
> Subject: Re: blind friendly or people friendly
> 
> 
> In principal, I agree.  However, to many, my employers included,
> Microsoft is the industry.
> 
> -Dave
> 
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, David Poehlman wrote:
> 
> > I agree.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Charles Hallenbeck" <hallenbeck@valstar.net>
> > To: "Speakup Distribution List" <speakup@speech.braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 1:27 PM
> > Subject: blind friendly or people friendly
> >
> >
> > All the recent posts about how to configure outlook express to be
> > "blind friendly" is a little troubling to me. It seems to me that
> > the issue is bigger than that. There are industry standards, and
> > there are Microsoft standards, and often the problem comes
> > because the two are not the same. One way to resolve the problem
> > is for everyone, blind or otherwise, to use outlook express and
> > thus use Microsoft standards everywhere. But the world is larger
> > than Microsoft, and many of us who use Linux follow the industry
> > standard - e.g., plain text for email, iso8859-1 for a standard
> > western character set, and the like.
> >
> > Another way to resolve the problem is for users of outlook
> > express, blind or otherwise, to configure their software to
> > adhere to industry standards rather than Microsoft standards. I
> > think that is very different from being "blind friendly"... It is
> > being "people friendly".
> >
> > Grumpily - Chuck
> >
> >
> > Visit me now at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> > The Moon is Waning Gibbous (59% of Full)
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: blind friendly or people friendly

[Shaun Oliver]

here here.
if we all adheared to one standard, we would be much better off.
I can assure you that in the event I need to use outlook excreata, I'll
ensure that everything will be set for plane text.


-- 
Shaun Oliver

Marriage is a three ring circus:
engagement ring, wedding ring, and suffering.
                -- Roger Price

Email: shauno@goanna.net.au
Icq: 76958435

Re: blind friendly or people friendly

[Janina Sajka]

Chuck:

Let's hope the judge knows how to spell monopoly.

On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:

> All the recent posts about how to configure outlook express to be
> "blind friendly" is a little troubling to me. It seems to me that
> the issue is bigger than that. There are industry standards, and
> there are Microsoft standards, and often the problem comes
> because the two are not the same. One way to resolve the problem
> is for everyone, blind or otherwise, to use outlook express and
> thus use Microsoft standards everywhere. But the world is larger
> than Microsoft, and many of us who use Linux follow the industry
> standard - e.g., plain text for email, iso8859-1 for a standard
> western character set, and the like.
> 
> Another way to resolve the problem is for users of outlook
> express, blind or otherwise, to configure their software to
> adhere to industry standards rather than Microsoft standards. I
> think that is very different from being "blind friendly"... It is
> being "people friendly".
> 
> Grumpily - Chuck
> 
> 
> Visit me now at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck
> The Moon is Waning Gibbous (59% of Full)
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

-- 
	
				Janina Sajka, Director
				Technology Research and Development
				Governmental Relations Group
				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)

Email: janina@afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175

Chair, Accessibility SIG
Open Electronic Book Forum (OEBF)
http://www.openebook.org

Re: blind friendly or people friendly

[Kirk Wood]

Chuck, I like what you said but note one problem: Current RFC allows for
html email. It isn't just m$ and in fact, they were not the
first. Personally I just can't believe how much crying goes on this list
about the subject.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nowlan's Theory:
        He who hesitates is not only lost, but several miles from
        the next freeway exit.

Re: blind friendly or people friendly

[Brian Borowski]

Just maybe that might have something to do with the fact that you don't use
speech for your primary source of input from the computer.

Brian


On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Kirk Wood wrote:

> Chuck, I like what you said but note one problem: Current RFC allows for
> html email. It isn't just m$ and in fact, they were not the
> first. Personally I just can't believe how much crying goes on this list
> about the subject.
>
> =======
> Kirk Wood
> Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
>
> Nowlan's Theory:
>         He who hesitates is not only lost, but several miles from
>         the next freeway exit.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
>

Re: blind friendly or people friendly

[Frank Carmickle]

IMHO this is a load of shit.  I don't like listening to people complaining
either.  The point is html mail is a waste of bandwidth and disk space.  
Nobody really needs to read most mail in html.  So instead of the
complaining that most people will do I will offer a procmail recipe.  I
will post it tomorrow.  Blind people are not the only people who don't
like html mail.

Oh and I didn't waste my time reading all the shit mail that went on about
the windows mailers.  But I do have to say that it is polite to have ">"
in front of quoted material.  

And here is a good example of snipping quotes which took me 3 seconds.

On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, Kirk Wood wrote:

> Chuck, I like what you said but note one problem: Current RFC allows for
> html email. It isn't just m$ and in fact, they were not the
> first. Personally I just can't believe how much crying goes on this list
> about the subject.

-- 
     Frank Carmickle
phone:     412 761-9568
email:     frankiec@dryrose.com