Tapio Kelloniemi <persistent.spam@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 10:56:55AM +0100, Mario Lang wrote: >> I can try to summarize the main issues here for you. I'm afraid I dont >> know of any specific web sites which would be detailed enough >> to explain the whole situation to you. >> >> In general, at soon as some application has a text-mode >> user interface (ncurses, command-line based, readline based or so on), >> it is quite useable by people with visual disabilities (braille >> or speech output users). > > Unless the GUI and TUI interfaces differ significantly like in GLAME, > where GUI is for poor whimps (as their manual says) and TUI is for > scheme programmers. Well, I agree partly. On the one hand, there will always be a difference between TUI and GUI interfaces. This is just because there are some UI elements that can not really be easily duplicated in Text-mode. However, what is most important is that the user actually has some way to access the underlying functionality that the application provides. In that sense, cglame actually fullfills this requirement, since it (as far as I remember) allows you to do most operations that you can do from the GUI from within Scheme. Granted, its a hard learning curve, especially if you compare it to how sighted people approach it (just open the damn thing, and click around). But neverthless, cglame is still better than no cglame. >> If you use GTK2 as a toolkit, there is a slight chance your application >> might be useable by the same category of users since there >> is some ongoing effort to make GNOME accessible. > > This Gnopernicus stuff is really in early stage and very buggy. It is > almost like trying to read a book with a microscope (the problem is > not the same, but results probably are). Yup, thats what I was trying to say, just not in such harsh words :-) -- CYa, Mario
