It is with much interest that I have been following the remarks of Dr. Don Parkes regarding TGD vs. TTT. I have long been a proponent of TGD, although it is dismissed by many who prepare graphics masters for mass production, as they say it doesn't present enough contrast in textures and patterns. It does, however, have an important place in the classroom, especially since the introduction of its voice output feature; and that has been my pitch in trying to justify purchasing it for my school district. Unfortunately, at present we have no braille reading students in our regular education programs so it doesn't seem to be a high priority at this time with the "powers that be." I have also been introduced to the features of the Talking Tactile Tablet. Needless to say, it would be advantageous to students to resolve the concerns at hand. Patent issues aside, vision impaired students need all the help they can get. There is one thing I am truly perplexed about with reference to this debate. On her web site, Ms. Rosenblum states: "The Authoring Tool project is being carried out under funding from the National Institute for Disability and Rehabilitation Research, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services of the United States Department of Education." If there are valid patent concerns--and it seems apparent that there are--then why has funding been approved for this project on such a high national level?