Re: X Accessibility (Was: Gnopernicus ...)
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 04:20:11PM +0300, Veli-Pekka Tatila wrote:
> Kenny Hitt wrote:
> Swing was supposed to add accessibility support. Does Gnopernicus work with
> Awt or Swing at all?
>
Gnopernicus is supposet to work with Swing. You need to install Sun's
JDK and built the java-access-bridge from gnome.org to get it to work in
Debian.
> Ouch, that's the general problem with Linux access as you said. But don't
> worry, things don't look good on the Windows side either, as Supernova has
>
I think you're not understanding the accessibility of Linux. You're
thinking the only way to use a computer is with a GUI. The only problem
with Linux Access is with GUI apps. That isn't a big loss, just
annoying. My only interest in Gnome is Mozilla access. I haven't found
any GUI mail client that does as well as mutt. I've had full access to
mutt since I installed my first Debian box in Oct 2000. I installed
that box without any sighted help. The only special requirement was a
hardware synth and a boot floppy patched with speakup.
The same with editing. Gedit just doesn't come close to the fuctionality of
vim. Once again, I had access to vim the first day I installed Linux.
If a console browser suddenly supported all the features of Mozilla, I
would probably never start a Gnome session. Actually, that's not true.
I would still play with it so I can support my sighted friends who use
Gnome.
> I see. Linux has been disappointing in two ways. Firstly, although it's got
> it's pros as well, many people expect a Windows-like OS when they are told
> LInux is an alternative to Windows. The other thing is that visually
> impaired people expect good, out-of-the-box accessibility that is on a par
> with win access, or surpasses what's being offered in Windows. This is not
> yet the case on the X side at least.
>
Actually, I find Linux to be more accessible than Windows. The catch is
you have to learn a new way to look at the computer as well as a new set
of programs. A few years ago, I subscribed to a general accessibility
discussion list. I finally decided to unsubscribe because most of my
posts ended up being "I can already do this in Linux, checkout program
x". The moderator was pushing the idea of a combined interface using
dialogs and other controls combined with text commands. That's my
current interface to Linux. Package management in Debian is a good
example. Sometimes I use apt-get, sometimes apt-cache, and sometimes
aptitude. It just depends on what I want to do at the time.
> What's FreedomBox? Doesn't ring a bell.
>
Freedombox is a commercial product designed to make web access easy for
people new to computers. It is a stand alone version of Mozilla with
speech output. You pay Freedombox a yearly subscription for their
services. Unfortunately, the app wants to control your sound card, so
you can't run a Gnome screen reader while using the product. Check out
http://freedombox.info
to learn more.
> >Windows screen readers hook into the video driver <snip> The equivalent
> >in Linux is the X server. All you would end up with if graphics data.
> >You would need other programs to try to guess what the data means.
> Really? I'm not sure how these things work in Windows but:
> I'm dead certain they cannot be using real-time OCR to determine screen
> contents. ALso, if the X font server renders things using unicode fonts,
> you should be able to get the text by looking at the character codes sent,
> right?
>
No. My comparing the X server to the graphics driver in Windows is miss
leading. The basic designg of the GUI in Linux is different than
Windows. X-windows existed before MS Windows. X11 is a protocol
instead of a particular program. The GUI you see in Linux is the group
of programs the Linux distro decided to use to get a GUI interface.
These programs change with time. Also, the standard seems to get
updated occasionally. You might want to read the
XWindow-Overview-HOWTO. I only use english, so my system has the file
in /usr/share/doc/HOWTO/en-txt/
There are other X-Windows HOWTOs in that dir, you might want to read
them, but you should use Debian's configuration system as much as
possible instead of following the advice in these files.
Windows screen readers have an advantage because the GUI is a core part
of Windows. I last messed with a Windows program in late 1999, so my
info is probably slightly outdated. There are a fixed number of system
calls all Windows apps use to display data. Windows screen readers hook
into Windows at a low level so they can intercept these messages. Check
out the source for a C program in Windows. Somewhere in the source you
will see a function called something like
Win-Main
This function is a loop used to process messages sent to the app by the
Windows oss. Even apps with non standard controls talk to Windows with
the same interface.
>
> >Alt-c is always cancel, and alt-o is ok.
> Do enter and esc serve the same purpose?
>
Oopse, looks like I spoke before looking enough. Escape seems to behave the
same as cancel. Also, alt c can be the shortcut for close in dialogs
that don't have a cancel button. Enter isn't the default for ok.
Pressing enter on the ok button works, but not if the focus is on
another control.
>
> >starts at the bottom of the page instead of the top.
> For the life of me, I cannot see why the bottom should be a sensible
> starting point. Does it wrap around to the top?
>
No, it doesn't seem to wrap. Starting at the bottom of the page is
considered a bug and is supposed to be fixed in a later release.
> >If we get off topic, I'm
> >sure Mario will tell us.
> Is he the moderator or founder of the list? Just curious.
>
Yes.
Kenny
Reply to: