They really should have a device that can be trained to understand certain shapes and just say what they are. Some which you could point at any visual serface. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Janina Sajka" <janina@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 6:05 AM Subject: Re: An idea, > Hi, Lorenzo: > > Others have responded with reference to what an X server does, and > doesn't do. I want to respond to two other particular points from your > message. > > Lorenzo Taylor writes: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > ... Gnopernicus, for example, is using libraries that > > rely on certain information ent by the underlying application libraries. > > Unfortunately, this implementation causes only some apps to speak while others > > which use the same widgets but whose libraries don't send messages to the > > accessibility system will not speak. > > This is only partially correct. Any applications using those "same > widgets," as you put it, will speak. There are no exceptions. > > What causes them to not speak is that the properties required to make > them speak have not been supplied. So, Gnopernicus is getting an empty > string to renderd, which I suppose it dutifully renders as silence. > > Fortunately, these are open source applications and we don't need an > advocacy campaign to resolve these kinds of problems. A solid example of > this at work is the Gnome Volume Control. It was written with gtk2, but > the developers did not supply all the relevant property data. So, a > blind programmer came along one weekend, fixed it, and submitted the > patch which has shipped with the rest of Gnome Volume Control ever > since. > > Now the next point ... > > > But it occurs to me that X is simply a > > protocol by which client applications send messages to a server which renders > > the proper text, windows, buttons and other widgets on the screen. I believe > > that a screen reader that is an extension to the X server itself, (like Speakup > > is a set of patches to the kernel) would be a far better solution, as it could > > capture everything sent to the server and correctly translate it into humanly > > understandable speech output without relying on "accessibility messages" being > > sent from the client apps. > > > As other have pointed out, there's nothing to be gained by speaking RGB > values at some particular X-Y mouse coordinate location. But, I'm sure > that's not what you really intend. If I interpret you correctly you're > suggesting some kind of mechanism whereby a widget of some kind can be > reliably identified and assigned values that the screen reader can > henceforth utter. This is the approach with Windows OSM that has been > used over the past decade, and it's what allows screen readers, like > JFW, to develop interfaces based on scripts. For instance, Take widget > number 38,492 and call it "volume slider," and speak it before anything > else on screen when it shows up on screen, and facilitate the method > that will allow user to use up and down arrow to change it's value, > etc., etc. > > It is arguable, and has been cogently argued over the past 18 months, > that the failure of the original Desktop Accessibility Architecture > promoted by Sun and Gnome was to not provide such mechanisms. A great > part of the intent of the Orca screen reader proof of concept was to > provide exactly this kind of functionality. I believe this is now being > addressed, though I'm not aware any code for newer Gnopernicus (or post > Gnopernicus) readers is yet released. However, I do fully expect that > Gnopernicus is not the last word in desktop screen readers. > > Janina > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
