Good evening Sir Knight, smiling.
Riding to the rescue again are you?
I mind not an epic if it is informative. After all many epics are
classics of literature going firth for centuries.
In context below.
You might try Michael Stutz's "Linux Cookbook" (another book
with the same title, by Carla Schroeder is also available,
but I've not read that one, so I can't speak to it) is
freely available online at
http://dsl.org/cookbook/cookbook_toc.html
I will most certainly take a look at this one. The title sounds
welcoming.
I presently have this one,
www.debian-handbook.info
Which frankly is wonderful for a class, but not as fundamental as I might
wish.
I have it in dead-tree, and even as a long-time *nix user, I
learned new things reading it.
Sounds even better, if I can take the book down and use it on my main
machine.
You might be able to find something at a local community
college. Unfortunately, from what I've seen Linux has
gotten to the degree of "user friendliness" (read "things
hidden behind a GUI") that these courses may not be quite so
accessible, or they might teach a particular distro.
Just so, my equal slight concern with a users group. One must to my mind
master the screen reader and the os at the same time.
Because of Linux's clay like nature though, some are hiding flexibility
behind a gui in an effort to look more like windows.
If you can give examples, others here on the list might be
able to help.
I sent Larry Hart two examples privately, am sure I have that note to
share.
A cursory read over the docs at
http://www.linux-speakup.org/spkguide.txt I see a lot of
references to "keypad {number}" which usually refers to the
keypad on the side of a regular keyboard. On a laptop,
those keys are often translated to the right portion of the
keyboard so you have M=0, J=1, K=2, L=3, U=4, I=5, O=6, and
7, 8, and 9 are the same. Sometimes this needs to be
enabled by either a "numlock" or "function lock" button, but
laptops vary so much in this regard that you might need
sighted help to test them out.
I am going to check if there has been a upgrade since my copy of the
manual mid 2012 or so. The wonderful advantage of my DOS screen reader is
that I rarely have to take my hands off the main keyboard to review stuff.
I can use a screen review structure etc.
Will share the key stroke strangeness though as the keypad controls
were not the issue.
These are called "shell scripts" and are much more powerful
than .bat files in DOS. Over at Linux Journal, Dave Taylor
has a long-running series of "Work the shell" articles
archived at
http://www.linuxjournal.com/users/dave-taylor
which can walk you through the basics through more advanced
usages.
Will visit this too, but this illustrates my point so to speak.
I could spend years reading up on the various ways to do things...instead
of finding simple paths to doing them.
Again the advantage of in person work. I have to know what I have in the
first place understandably before I can know what I need to script.
When I first came to computing in 1988 I spent two days learning the
screen reader some applications and some basics about DOS itself.
Additionally I learned where to go to learn more as I needed. When I
changed screen reader programs to this one in 1994 or so, it took a half a
day.
I could simply keep moving professionally incorporating the new programs
into my work life.
I desire the same with Debian and its built in screen reader speakup. To
learn hands on what I must to function and be done with it.
Additionally, most distros come with a multitude of
full-fledged programming languages you can use for more
complex tasks. I tend to prefer Python, but Perl and Ruby
are both usually available.
See above.
Sigh, again I have another profession, becoming a programmer is not what
I want to do to manage my professional needs.
I would rather once I get a grasp of this thing in the first place, find
others to do what I may or may not be able to do myself fast enough.
From the console, I've found that it's easier to use a
format(s). So you might author your document in DocBook,
LaTeX, HTML, or Markdown using your favorite editor, then
use a command to produce a resulting PDF, HTML, or .DOC file
output.
I do not use a text editor I use a full complete and functional word
processor. There is a considerable difference.
Why use a text editor when I can in Wordperfect have my choice of four
different forms of ASCII text?
I tend to compose in HTML and then generate output
directly from that (if I even need to, as most folks know
how to handle HTML files just fine).
HTML? that is used for writing websites as I understand it mostly Ducky,
not well documents smiles.
Not in my fields smiles. In fact some of them scream at the very
suggestion of Microsoft word because the program does not build on itself.
Thank goodness for rtf which later editions of wordperfect swing
fantastically.
I can do this in say wp 6.0 save it as rtf to share and all is fine.
I need not print in or write in Linux of course, just trying to give the
second computer an additional purpose in life.
> I've heard of folks running WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS inside a
dosbox, but I've not played with that, nor can I speak to
how accessible it might be.
Actually I was never fond of wp5.1 for dos. I use the last three editions
6.0 6.1 and 6.2 instead. that is a fine example of individual
differences. wp 5.1 is so simplified it makes me crazy.
Still one can run dos editions of wordperfect under say windows xp. There
are modern printer drivers written and everything.
see the lists at
www.wpuniverse.com
I think.
In any case I have anew in box edition of wordperfect written for Linux.
If I can incorporate it into the Linux machine then I do word processing
on it, otherwise I use what already works.
Even at shellworld, as right now, I can use Pico, incorporated into Pine
and I raft an email. I can use it incorporated into lynx when writing my
gmail too.
Browsers come in a ton of flavors, some being more or less
accessible than others. I tend to prefer actual-Firefox
over Ice Weasel
Interestingly enough we just had a Firefox verses Ice Wiesel discussion on
the main Debian discussion list. The explanation was that there is no
difference between the two programs save the name.
The reasoning provided is that it was needful for copy right reasons. Are
there other actual differences then?
and I understand that
it has
pretty good > accessibility hooks under a GUI (i.e., running Orca rather
than Speakup/yasr/emacspeak). Others likely have better
input regarding the best GUI and terminal browsers.
Half a moment!
Why would one need to run more than one screen reader...at all?
Speakup is incorporated in Debian proper, for the most part that is. My
understanding has always been that one could just use it for everything.
If this is not the case then how many screen readers must one learn for
debian flexibility? Are the other built into the system already as well?
Since you note my use of shellworld, I will speak to that here.
Shellworld is not exactly Linux, although it is open source.
Still if Debian worked like shellworld I would not be worried in the
slightest!
I run things at shellworld much as I do in dos proper. I use the dos
dsl package I have ssh telnet into shellworld, and find elinks and links
and lynx etc. We do not have say ebrowse here, not close enough to what
shellworld actually is for use here.
We do have elinks here, which I Cannot have to my knowledge in pure dos
though because it requires spider monkey to compile it for low graphics
usage etc...although I got a post on the freedos list this morning which
may suggest otherwise now.
The shell gives me advantages yes, but there are things I cannot do with
ease work wise.
For example I cannot attend a webnair directly in shellworld without
issue.
If an associate sends me a link to a youtube source I must review, while I
can certainly follow the link using pine or Alpine here at shellworld, I
cannot actually reach the content here for many reasons.
I can use something like movgrab, type in the entire yutube link use an
option to convert it into say mp3 or something, and have it, but that
takes a while.
I can visit the youtube mobile site.
m.youtube.com
and search easily, but then the tasks here comes to using what I find
swiftly.
I cannot download eudio materials at my library website at shellworld at
all.
It does not mean I could not use elinks or links to do this directly
from my computer, if I could run them directly from my computer.
I *should?* be able to do this in Ice Wiesel or Firefox though.
etc. etc.
I adore shellworld, the things I can do with documents, the ways I can
work with mail, But there are times when I need more direct access to
the content I require for work and the like.
I understand what you mean about it being a tool. I don't
know if you're currently dual-booting, if this one Linux
machine is your only boot-option, or if you're trying Linux
on another machine
I had a separate machine built for Linux. This one I am using now runs
pure dos , 7.1 in fact.
(I see your email address puts you at a
shell account, so that might give you a nice play-ground).
It has in theory at least. Part of why I wanted an actual Linux machine
was the suggestion that shellworld works as Linux does...such is not what
I am finding even in this helpful discussion.
I can use my dos screen reader, TELNET to shellworld, and do what I need.
Now, if I could keep my dos screen reader, TELNET into my Linux box, run
ice weasel from here or firefox or whatever without having to use
speakup at all, or learn the code for commands that run on for lines, we
are talking efficiency!
Actually, why can I not do this?
Use the same ssh telnet package I use in dos to come here and telnet into
my own Linux setup of debian squeeze?
I started with Linux back in '95, installing Slackware from
umpteen floppies was a LONG afternoon. One machine was my
work-horse, while my other machine was for playing around.
I think I reformatted that second machine 50-100 times in
the span of a year. But it gave me the freedom to be
fearless.
What a terrific line, the freedom to be fearless.
When I came to computing in 1988, it was the first and last time I bought
a machine from a computer store. I had to get it checked once and
they promptly lost all of my data. After that I learn what I needed to
for upkeep, and or found the talent to build my machines for me to my
specific requirements. I have done it that way always.
I spent two days training on what was then vert plus, learning
the programs I would need for law school, including lexux nexus and west
law, and of course wordperfect. I learned the basics of dos, and how to
build on my wisdom when I needed to. This i have done. I have changed
synthesizers and screen readers many many times, added the needs of my
different professions, Dos editions as well.
But I found the training in person when needful, or clear direct and
understandable manuals when I did not.
I did not have to write my web browser, or my word processor, or even my
monopoly game.
I should not have to program things to use them.
simply typing say ice weasel from a command line should launch a browser
and get me going.
I might need to edit my config.sys or audioexec.bat to insure I get maximum
speech written in, but this scripting stuff should not be needful, a fun
task for those who enjoy it, but needful, no.
If I must learn another screen reader, then one screen reader should work
for the entire operating system which ever screen reader that is...end
of story.
Say much the way one or now two screen readers have always worked for
apple systems.
Come to think of it, the way my present dos screen reader could work in
windows too had I bothered with windows.
I have been running my work life, often under deadline for so long, I
do not need to even give my screen reader a second thought. It is solid
like the floor, I can count on its function and insure my work knowing I
can come through on that front at least.
If something does not work in lynx the cat, I try links or elinks here at
shellworld etc. All using the same screen reader.
I draft documents of all kinds in wordperfect, saving them into something
else if I must share them.
And I can I have learned do a couple of tricks with bookshare XML files to
convert them into formats I can bring up easily into wordperfect for
reading note taking and the like.
Mercy I can with a utility and my reading edge Scan sprinted book into
text move it over into wordperfect and be done with it.
I desire from Debian the same flexibility for the very few but very
important things I cannot do as easily now.
Such is why I desired this Linux setup.
As always, this list is a great resource on which to ask
questions. Especially if you're willing to wade through my
epic-length replies (grins).
Tim, I learned more in this one email than I have learned in the past two
days on the debian list.
Epic all. you. want.
In fact, your providing such wise writing brings up that TELNETTing
question.
Could I indeed do with my own Linux debian squeeze box what I presently
do with shellworld?
use ssh TELNET and without changing the screen reader run the programs
over there?
Not just the basic things like pine and alpine, not that I need that, but
browsers like ebrowse or even firefox or elinks and say because there is
no layer between me and my actual hardware, say play a file on a website
with it running through the speakers and sound card of my separate Linux
box?
If not, why not?
>
Take care, and feel free to ask questions here on the list
as many of us are here because we find it fun to be helpful!
Thanks again for the fine fine start!
Karen
-Tim
_______________________________________________
Blinux-list mailing list
Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list