Hmmmm, if we're going to use our tonges, there goes the idea of using paper. Greg On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 06:32:34AM -0500, Charles Hallenbeck wrote: > Braille would still be readable if it were much smaller, say a > half or a third of its standard size. The only thing is, you > would have to use your tongue to read it, since your tongue is > (almost) the only part of your body which is sufficiently > sensitive. > > How about getting back to computing? > > > On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, William Hubbs wrote: > > > Would braille still be readable if we decreased the size? > > If we decreased it too much, I don't think we would be able to read it. > > > > William > > > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 07:12:27PM -0600, Kirk Wood wrote: > > > > hahahahahahaha. Let's do away with print anyway (grin). > > > > Greg > > > > > > Of course we could work on making smaller braille fonts. If you shrink the > > > spacing by just 20% you would fit so much more on the page. > > > > > > ======= > > > Kirk Wood > > > Cpt.Kirk at 1tree.net > > > > > > Nowlan's Theory: > > > He who hesitates is not only lost, but several miles from > > > the next freeway exit. > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Speakup mailing list > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Speakup mailing list > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > > *<<<=-=>>>*<<<=-=>>>*<<<=-=>>>*<<<=-=>>>* > Visit me at http://www.mhonline.net/~chuckh > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (3% of Full) > > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
