[brailleblaster] Re: Thoughts on the Specification

  • From: Michael Whapples <mwhapples@xxxxxxx>
  • To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 20:50:26 +0000

I had probably jumped ahead of what I wanted to express.

So writing what I feel is needed for the help in more generic terms: Help should be viewable in a system standard to that platform. Standard meaning something which the user of that system would be used to using and having an instance of it provided by default as part of the operating system. The goal of this requirement is to make it that minimal effort is needed by the user to open and read help, so making it as easy as possible for new users to find out how to make the most of BrailleBlaster. A result of this would be that users will not need to request support for the routine uses of BrailleBlaster, freeing those providing support to pay attention to users encountering bugs or advanced issues.

Now help systems perfectly satisfy that requirement and is a perfectly valid option to be considered. I said browser simply because that was what first came to mind when thinking of HTML and seemed a nice consistent thing across platforms (as mentioned java has a way of invoking browsers and so I thought would be a simple thing to do).

I would be happy either way, help systems or browsers, browsers were just what came to mind first.

Michael Whapples
On 10/12/10 18:00, Alex Jurgensen wrote:
Hi Michael,

I agree with the fact that the help should be in HTML, but why do you suggest that we use the browser as the default place to look for help.

Help systems, such as "help Viewer" on the Mac, are capable of displaying HTML files. I suggest that we use this method as the default place to look for help.

This is where users will probably look for help first.

I am also agreeing with the fact that we should have a support/documentation section of the Braille Blaster website.

Let me know what you think.

Regards,
Alex,


On 2010-12-10, at 9:35 AM, Michael Whapples wrote:

My point was, I have not had the need to read daisy documents, I haven't read a daisy document therefore I have nothing to read such documents. Now there are two solutions should BrailleBlaster documents be only in daisy: I need to go and find out about a daisy reader get it and learn how to use it (quite a bit of work just to read some help). Now as you point out by having BrailleBlaster I would have something to read daisy documents, however you possibly end up with a circular problem, I have a problem with BrailleBlaster therefore want to read help, but to read help I need to use BrailleBlaster which is what I would have the problem with.

Using HTML would be using the browser the user uses to browse the internet, therefore they would be familiar with how to use the software to read help and all platforms would have a viewer by default.

I am not saying don't include a daisy version of help, but I feel the default help people would refer to would be in html.

Michael Whapples
On 10 Dec 2010, at 16:26, John J. Boyer wrote:

Well, I've read lots of Daisy documents, both in raw form and in braille translations. Using BrailleBlaster you would be able to navigate through a Daisy document without even knowing it was such. It would be just like
using any other word processor to read a document, except that it would
be hopefully more accessible.

What I would like to see is BrailleBlaster being used to create the help
documents. These could then be translated to html using xslt or evet to
pdf, using other tools.

John B.

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 04:12:35PM +0000, Michael Whapples wrote:
I would say the HTML version is necessary, daisy is in my mind a marginal format. What I mean by this is that even as someone who probably falls in the group of people daisy was aimed at I have never read a daisy document therefore this would impose a heavy learning curve for me just to read BrailleBlaster's help if no HTML version was included.

As I remember this was discussed before on this list and the outcome of that was HTML would be the format for the help documents.

Michael Whapples
On 10 Dec 2010, at 16:16, Alex Jurgensen wrote:

Hi John B.,

I also agree with you as far as distributing Braille Blaster's help with the applciation. However, I suggest that we also provide an HTML version, packaged as the operating system's help system requires, in addition to a DAISY formatd coy.

This would allow us to take advantage of the built-in help systems found on the various platforms and would require very little work on our behalf.

Just my thoughts.

Regards,
Alex,


On 2010-12-10, at 7:58 AM, John J. Boyer wrote:


Another thing I don't like is putting the help online. I think it should be part of the BrfailleBlaster distribution and should be in the form of
simple Daisy xml files. These can be edited and even created in the
Daisy view and translated into braille and embossed. The only advantage to opening them in the default browser would be that users could follow
links to other sites. The tutorials are already supposed to be
distributed with BrailleBlaster, so why not the entire help. The user will be able to follow links to other parts of the documents, so there
will be no problem with an active table of contents.

John B.

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 07:19:09AM -0800, John Gardner wrote:
So the spec needs to be trifurcated with separate pieces for the three OS? Maybe John B should accumulate a list of UI items that need to be different,
and then I'll write up a new draft with these changes.



John G





From: brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto:brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alex Jurgensen
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 9:26 PM
To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [brailleblaster] Re: Thoughts on the Specification



Hi John G.,



As I have said before, in my opinion, there is a fine line when it comes to
creating a user experience that users will be familiar with.



Would it not be better then to do the recent items item differently for the
different platforms.



We will already have to make several changes to the UI, if we are going to
account for differences on the various platforms.



If the work on customizing the UI experiences for the different platforms is carried out, would it not be easy to incorporate the recent items menu
structure into the changes we make while creating the various UIs?



Let me know what you think.



Regards,

Alex,





On 2010-12-09, at 9:04 PM, John Gardner wrote:





Hmmm, this is the way it is specified now. And there are certainly Windows aps that put recent documents into a sub-menu, including ViewPlus IVEO software. I don't think that consistency with the majority of Windows aps for this usage is particularly important, so unless I hear a good reason to
change, I propose to leave this spec as-is.



John G





From: brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto:brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alex Jurgensen
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 8:58 PM
To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [brailleblaster] Re: Thoughts on the Specification



Hi John,



Native Mac apps seem to put recent documents in a menu item called "Open
Recent" that comes after the "Open" menu item.



I am not sure about Linux.



Regards,

Alex,





On 2010-12-09, at 5:09 PM, John Gardner wrote:






Hello all, sorry I've been pretty quiet lately. But I guess I still need to take responsibility for the spec. You are right that the spec doesn't mention context menus. It does give a menu item for recent documents, but your proposal to include it at the end of the file menu is indeed the common way to do it in Windows. I'm happy to change that if it's also the way it's
done in Mac and Linux aps.  Advice please.

I apparently missed the conversations about context menus. I'm also happy to expand the spec to include context menus too. Do we have a consensus on
what should go there?

John


-----Original Message-----
From: brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of qubit
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 9:02 AM
To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [brailleblaster] Re: Thoughts on the Specification

Yes, JohnG and Yuemei -- are you there???
Who owns the spec? JohnG was the original author. Is he also the one to
update it or did he hand it off to JohnB?

I agree about the context menus. On windows that would go without saying as

context menus are pervasive and very useful. In windows, there is a "recent

documents" option in the global start menu, but it lists almost everything anywhere that is either a document or music or video. Brailleblaster's recent documents option could be limited only to the docs that have been
edited by brailleblaster, right?
An alternative is to just tack the recent brailleblaster documents at the end of the file menu, like what happens in many windows apps I have seen.
Is this also prevalent on linux or mac?  What will go in the recent
documents?

Another point: what should happen when a document has been transcribed but edited in the braille window by the user? Are those changes marked in such a way that a retranslation of the file won't undo it? What if the daisy document has changed and there needs to be a retranslation? Just wondering.

I need to review the spec.
--le
The idea of putting me
John and Mike,
----- Original Message -----
From: "John J. Boyer" <john.boyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:john.boyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> To: <brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 5:29 AM
Subject: [brailleblaster] Re: Thoughts on the Specification


I guess I've revealed my ignorance of GUIs. I'm really a command-line
guy and find GUIs difficult to understand. But I'm learning.

After thinkikng things over I came to about the same conclusions. The top window should have a title bar, the menus and the status bar. The
braille and Daisy windows would be child windows. Switching from one
document to another would replace these windows. The print and emboss
previews would be dialog boxes. The "Welcome screens" would also be
dialog boxes. I think the specification might be reworded to make things
clearer.

The specification is quite detailed about the keystrokes to be used.
These may have to be modified to conform to the usage of different
platforms. I think this is something that we should provide for now,
like internationalization. Putting it in later could be much more work. How might this be done? I think SWT provides for specifying keystrokes
for functions.

The specification says there will be an item inn the file menu  for
opening a list of recent documents. I think this would be acceptable in
Windows.

I like the idea of a "context" menu for different views. Perhaps this
should be added to the specification.

What happened to the ViewPlus people? Wehaven't heard from them for a
loing time.

John

On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 09:59:06AM +0000, Michael Whapples wrote:




Hello,

I don't think having the Braille and daisy views as top level windows

with there own menus would be very natural. Firstly it doesn't really

fit with any other GUI application I can think of, normally they either

modify available menu options depending on the current view or they grey

out unavailable options. So as greyed out options are fairly "normal" to

encounter I don't see why they would be confusing. Then there is the

case of platforms where menus aren't actually in the window but get

placed by applications in a system menu bar like in Mac OSX (NOTE: SWT

will automatically handle this for you). As an example of the Mac

situation, in safari the web browser, even when I go to its preferences

all menu options are still there but ones which are irrelevant to

preferences (eg. the option to show/hide the status bar) are greyed out.



Also the idea of two top level windows being present in one application

at the same time just seems odd to me, I couldn't imagine it would look

right (it would probably look like two separate applications). Then what

happens when there are more documents opened, your description seems to

give me more top level windows and more clutter of the desktop. Then

there is the situation of "I am working on a document in BrailleBlaster,

I have finished on that document so I close the document but keeping

BrailleBlaster open as I want to work on another document", what do I

encounter at the point when BrailleBlaster has no open documents? Having

the document views as child elements of a "BrailleBlaster appliccation

top level window" I would be left with an empty BrailleBlaster window

containing only the menus and toolbars (IE. no sub windows), allowing me

to go to the menu and choose open document or new or whatever task I

want to do. Also with my idea of the view, multiple documents would just

lead to more sub views, the desktop only ever has one BrailleBlaster top

level window.



Now one thing which might be desired is a shortcut pop-up menu specific

to each view. What I mean is one of those context menus which are

activated by right clicking the mouse of a UI element (use the

applications key or may be shift+f10 and on Mac with voiceover

vo+shift+m). In these context menus only the options relevant to that

element would be shown.



Michael Whapples

On 09/12/10 04:55, John J. Boyer wrote:

This sounds good. My understanding was that the Daisy and Braille

windows would each have their own menus. The specification doesn't say

so explicitly, but it seemed reasonable, since some things would be

possible in one window and some things in another. If the Daisy and

Braille windows are embedded in a top window with the menus, status bar

and toolbar, the grayed-out options could be confusing and frustrating

for the user. Is this actually the way it will be?



So the print and embosser previews are basically big dialog boxes. I

don't remember anyone saying they should be open continually. They are

opened when needed.



I don't think BrailleBlsster should display multiple documents

simultaneously, since it already has two views for each document.

Rather, when a user switched to another document these view would be

changed for that document.



The Daisy and Braille windows should prbably be called views instead,

especially if they don't contain their own menus.



John



On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 08:45:53PM +0000, Michael Whapples wrote:

We seem to be getting a whole jumble of things here. A window is a very

generic thing. A dialog is a type of window, normally used to show

messages or let users select options. A dialog is not embedded in the

top level window but can be such that it prevents the user going back to

the main window. A dialog might not cover the main application top level

window. Then there are child windows (they may have another name) which

usually is embedded into the top level window. These may be used for

multiple documents (eg. MS Word has been known to work like this I don't

know about their latest version). Finally then there are what I am

calling a top level window, these don't have any other window containing

them.



My feeling is:

* BrailleBlaster will have a top level window containing the menus and

such like which are common to all situations.

* The daisy viewer and Braille viewers will be child windows or may be

even panes within a child window or may be this will all work on the tab

idea. Anyway the main idea is these will be embedded into the top level

window.

* Print and preview will be dialog boxes as these are both actions (IE.

I go to print/emboss a document or I go and view how it will be

printed). I see no reason why print preview would need to be open

continually.



Michael Whapples

On 08/12/10 20:13, John J. Boyer wrote:

I've never actually looked at a print preview window. Has anyone seen

an

embosser preview window? I would think that programs would handle

preview by opening a temporary window that either hides the existing

window or minimizes them.



John



On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 12:27:33PM -0600, qubit wrote:

Regarding What happens to the windows when a print preview is active:

I wonder if opening a new window is a good idea.

I am growing to like one feature in eclipse's UI: eclipse will cycle

through

all the various windows if you hold control and type F7 repeatedly.

It has a lot of rather busy windows. I wonder what it looks like to a

sighted person.



As for print preview, I have no idea what to do if you are embossing a

document.  The image in the braille window doesn't necessarily look

like

the

output of the device.  Do the various embossers provide any kind of

API

for

knowing what the braille will look like?

Also, if viewing it on screen, you are further limited by the display

capabilities.



Interesting question. But do you really want there to be a hard coded

window for print preview, print and emboss? Couldn't it just be like

most

apps that put a command for print and emboss and print preview in the

file

menu? That could bring up a dialog.

Just wondering.

--le



----- Original Message -----

From: "John J. Boyer"<john.boyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:john.boyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>

To:<brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>

Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 9:24 AM

Subject: [brailleblaster] Thoughts on the Specification





I have just reread the specification carefully. It certainly hangs

together better for me than at the beginning. Here are some thoughts.

There is a menu item for opening a list of recent documents. These

documents should be on the menu, just below the exit choice, as they

are

ikn most word processors.



The ability to open recent documents means that the users will want

MDI.

Fortunately, this is not hard to implement.



We may need a third window for each document for print and embosser

previews. What happens to the Daisy and Braille windows when a preview

is chosen? Are they minimized?



John



--

John J. Boyer; President, Chief Software Developer

Abilitiessoft, Inc.

http://www.abilitiessoft.com

Madison, Wisconsin USA

Developing software for people with disabilities








--
John J. Boyer; President, Chief Software Developer
Abilitiessoft, Inc.
http://www.abilitiessoft.com
Madison, Wisconsin USA
Developing software for people with disabilities









Alex Jurgensen,

VoiceOver Trainer,

ASquared21@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ASquared21@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>



Visit us on the web at: www.vipbc.org <http://www.vipbc.org> <http://www.vipbc.org/>





Alex Jurgensen,

VoiceOver Trainer,

ASquared21@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ASquared21@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>



Visit us on the web at: www.vipbc.org <http://www.vipbc.org> <http://www.vipbc.org/>




--
John J. Boyer; President, Chief Software Developer
Abilitiessoft, Inc.
http://www.abilitiessoft.com
Madison, Wisconsin USA
Developing software for people with disabilities



Alex Jurgensen,
VoiceOver Trainer,
ASquared21@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ASquared21@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Visit us on the web at: www.vipbc.org <http://www.vipbc.org>



--
John J. Boyer; President, Chief Software Developer
Abilitiessoft, Inc.
http://www.abilitiessoft.com
Madison, Wisconsin USA
Developing software for people with disabilities





Alex Jurgensen,
VoiceOver Trainer,
ASquared21@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ASquared21@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Visit us on the web at:www.vipbc.org <http://www.vipbc.org/>


Other related posts: