my notes on l i n k s
kennyhitt at knology.net
Tue Nov 19 08:23:25 EST 2002
Hi. What programs are you talking about? More important, what purpose
do theese programs serve?
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 07:19:10AM -0500, ccrawford at acb.org wrote:
> I hope this red flag that I have been carrying around turns out to
> be not needed. I would like nothing more than to agree with you.
> If the console is not going away, then will the apps be able to be
> run from the console? If so, then I am a happy guy and if not, then my
> concern remains that development will happen for X and leave the consol
> to those who don't mind using older programs and those who still like
> As I say, I am more than happy to agree with you and my only point
> is to emphasize that we need to be vigilant about this and make sure the
> community understands it. There are already programs that will not run at
> the console level and I am hoping that is a fluke rather than a trend.
> Sure, programers can open the source code and re-engineer the program to
> work at the console level, but who will do it?
> so the strategy must be to always remind the teams doing X
> development that there are console users who need the access. Some may
> migrate to X just as there are many blind folks who say windows is now as
> accessible as DOS used to be. To some extent that is true, but what
> access there is relies upon a fragil and cost intensive environment. How
> much money are blind folks having to fork out just to keep up with the
> latest rease of whatever?
> -- charlie.
> ps: I hope you are not viewing this as an attack since it is only a
> On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Janina Sajka wrote:
> > I really don't know what to say, Charlie. Seems that whatever I say
> > doesn't register, and we comeback around to this same, nonspecific,
> > dread.
> > So, at the risk of revisiting the same discussion as we've had on
> > several occassions in the past on this list:
> > 1.) The console is not going away.
> > 2.) Mozilla includes support for accessibility, both in its Win and
> > Linux/Unix versions.
> > 3.) Gnopernicus will support Mozilla. There's a team of some 12
> > engineers working specifically on Mozilla accessibility.
> > Charles Crawford writes:
> > > From: Charles Crawford <ccrawford at acb.org>
> > >
> > > Janina,
> > >
> > > I read your message and I felt the shudder of dread that I
> > > remember when windows first became accessible. It's a double edged
> > > sword. I hoep we do not allow the console to go the way DOS did. The only
> > > encouraging thing o that fron that I have heard in a real ong time is the
> > > note the other day about .netserver with text based and command line driven
> > > utilities.
> > >
> > > -- chrlie.
> > >
> > > At 12:23 PM 11/18/02 -0500, you wrote:
> > > >Kenny Hitt writes:
> > > >> From: Kenny Hitt <kennyhitt at knology.
> > > >> I currently have lynx, w3m, and
> > > >> links installed. ... Maybe someone can figure out a way to combine them
> > > >> all into one mega browser.
> > > >
> > > >Well, hold on to your hat. Once we have gnopernicus, we'll be adding
> > > >Mozilla to the list.
> > > >
> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >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
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
More information about the Speakup