Laura, you're correct that the console interface is character based. And, I also want to say that we're not ignoring Gnome. It just doesn't do anything very useful yet. On the other hand, since you're a programmer, let me comment that the opportunity is there to make alternative interfaces for gnome apps, given the object architecture that support accessibility. In other words, it isn't necessarrily the gui which can provide access to a gnome app. It is possible to querry all available objects on the gnome desktop, or for a particular app, and obtain data, including text labels, data values, etc. So, it is reasonable to consider that one might, for instance, create an ncurses interface to gui applications. No one has built such an interface to my knowledge, but the opportunity is there. And there is a tool that exposes this data, though it does it graphically and it is not itself accessible by design--in order to avoid infinite regression. The tool is called at-poke. I would love to see some apps from the gnome desktop made accessible this way, while we wait for the gnome screen reader to become really usable, because there is intrinsically no reason to paint the gui for the user who can't appreciate it. In fact, it could be considered a waste of resources so to do. Laura Eaves writes: > Yes, linux and unix have always been more accessible because they are not > GUI, and I assume the console is text based and not graphical -- or am I > wrong? the last time I used a unix/linux system was in the mid 90s and most > all work was done command-line. I have joined this list as I am getting a > second pc in order to install and use linux for various reasons, and I want > to check out all the accessibility advancements since I moved to a windows > environment. > But just as sighted linux users dismiss the console interface, as you say, I > think it is equally inappropriate for a blind user to completely ignore the > GNOME GUI approach, and trying to make it accessible, as running a GUI > actually is a little more than just a bunch of icons covering up the same > operations -- the whole underpinning is implemented in an even-driven manner > and there is a different way of thinking of things -- well actually I > rejected GUI's for a very long time at work because I still had enough sight > to use screen mag for work, and could not use the GUI stuff when it reared > its ugly head... but after I lost my reading vision and switched to > windows -- partly to get experienced using speech and partly because I was > curious about its accessibility, I have actually gotten to like some of its > aspects, and can see that if made accessible, it is actually rather nice. > But I still miss unix extremely, and the flexibility, and the power of > things and clean way it handles system operations compared with windows... > Sorry I didn't mean to get off on this thread -- I guess I just wanted to > make the point that I am glad for the diversion I made into GUI apps and am > actually glad (if you can believe it) that I lost my vision in order to > force me to stop depending on it, and with my programming background I think > GUI programs can be very useful and accessible. > But there has to be a way to access the same functionality from the gui -- > to get back to command line when necessary, query for available commands and > docs, run scripts, etc. That is possible in windows but so much more > awkward! It is truely a straight jacket compared to linux. > Take care and I have enjoyed lurking on this list. I am learning a lot > about speakup, which is why I joined. > Take care. > --le
