This sounds like a realy good idea. I don't know that that kind of support can be added at that level though with out creating your own Linux Kernal Hybread. I also don't know what kind of work would have to be put into shells or other applications like pine to support something like this. I will say though this sounds a lot like the new windows html desk top and developers might be more inclinded to jumping on this band wagon than jumping on the idea of writing everything for emacs, gnome or supported types of xwindows. The real plus to this idea is it could be usefull not only to the blind but also to the sighted world at large. ken /whistler On Thu, 18 Mar 1999, Hans Zoebelein wrote: > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: 18 Mar 1999 18:10:24 -0000 > From: Lar Kaufman <lark@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: blinux-develop-request@xxxxxxxxxx > Subject: bomb shell > > > I apologize for making remarks that may have appeared "political" in > trying to examine what I perceived to be a political bias. The suggestion > of political arguments made me rethink an assumption on my part, however. > I'd like to suggest a different line of examination regarding the basic > user interface that might once and for all preserve user access to the > OS, if I could get some feedback from "those who know" about some specifics > of this and that technology, since I think I may have a novel solution to > the accessibility problem. > > Instead of asking "what other non-proprietary solution offers as flexible > solution to user access as emacs" I should have asked "how can we give > Linux low-level support for a rich, non-proprietary user interface?" The > answer that came up when I asked that was not emacs, but XML. If Linux > were capable of presenting information in the form of XML structures, it > would be a simple matter to plug in, at the shell, desktop, or application > level, a web browser interface; the operating system would not have to make > assumptions as to the user's mode of access except to deal with the installed > hardware in traditional Unix ways. Let me hasten to add that full XML > need not (probably should not) be supported, but useful structural markup > should be supported. For example, Linux would not send a message tagged as > "bold" information, but it could send a message tagged with "emphasis". > And Linux need not then concern itself with how the information it is > presenting will be rendered for the user, only that it was sent to devices > that are supported by default or user-chosen utilities to render it appropriatedly. > The tricky part is to define what subset of XML tagging is *necessary* for > OS-user interactions and what tag handling (recognition/stripping/ignoring) > Linux will perform on input from the user. And, if necessary and appropriate, > defining new tags to submit to the W3C to support open systems accessibility > at the lowest level. Getting an English voice message output to a sound card, > for example, would not be difficult, but getting a vocal response returned > to Linux and recognized as a choice or command is a tougher problem that > might best be handled by making the user's shell, desktop, or browser smart > enough to process the signal into the needed data for Linux to use. > > Does this seem viable without significantly distorting the kernel? > > -lar > "The sum of all we drive at is that every man may enjoy the same rights that > are granted to others." -- John Locke, 1689, A Letter Concerning Toleration > > > -- > To unsubscribe: mail blinux-develop-request@xxxxxxxxxx with > "unsubscribe" as the Subject. >