[jawsscripts] Re: advantages of object oriented over procedural API, plus Gw Fs Scripting methodology question.

  • From: Doug Lee <doug.lee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: jawsscripts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 04:28:56 -0400

I agree with Victor that the lack of standard data structure support
in JAWS scripting is a hassle.  I don't understand the comment about
VBScript not promoting open source access to assistive technology
though.  Not only are the VBScript scripts so far written presented
in source form, but VBScript is only one choice of several at the
disposal of scripters for Window-Eyes.  This openness may eventually
present its own problems, at least in some highly security-conscious
environments; but I don't see how that language support decision
is at all source-restrictive.

As for why object-orientedness could be an advantage to scripters:
A huge problem I've always seen in JAWS scripting is the lack of
isolation of code for one problem from code for another.  Build up
a set of scripts to address 15 issues without containing the code
for each unto itself, and you end up with a mess that's hard to
maintain.  This is largely why I started writing code in jsl files,
though I'm sure not all souls out there appreciate the number of
files for one scripting solution this causes me to produce occasionally.
Some of my jsl files really are sort of like objects though.  In
an object-oriented language, I would not have had to create my own
means of isolating things--special namespace prefixes, rules on
variable and function names, irregularly polymorphic use of function
parameters, etc.  Besides this though, the jsl method remains quite
limited compared to real objects because it is much harder to extend
a jsl without rewriting it than to extend a class, at least in a
better language than VBScript (and *that* is one of my biggest
issues with VBScript, that you can't properly inherit from a class!).
In JAWS, you can actually implement even more object-orientation
simulation by using jsb files and Use commands than by using jsl
files and Include commands, but I mostly avoid that to avoid the
runtime performance hit of loading a fleet of jsb files on every
Alt+Tab.

And finally, what the JAWS language might have over the GW offering:
For security-conscious people, such as on-site IT personnel at
various sites I've visited, I think the fact that the JAWS scripts
run within JAWS itself is a comfort.  JAWS scripts don't look and
act like application programs nearly as much as I expect GW scripts
will do in their eyes.  Whether this is actually a substantive
advantage remains to be seen.  I can't be sure what other pros JAWS'
approach may offer over the GW approach because I know the JAWS
environment better than the GW environment.

On Sun, Aug 03, 2008 at 11:44:47AM -0700, Victor Tsaran wrote:
Not to start a flame war here, but couple of points from myself.
1. Window-eyes opted to use proprietary technology, such as VBScript 
which, in my view, does not at all promote open source access to 
assistive technology.
2. JAWS scripting language isn't that bad, but it has two major 
pitfalls: we have to rely on FS to maintain it and it lacks some very 
basic data types, like floats and arrays. GW Micro did a smart thing by 
taking the burden of script maintainance off their shoulders.
Object-oriented programming is great for larger projects but for what 
most people would use scripting language, it is probably irrelevant.

Anyways, just my two cents.
V

Geoff Chapman wrote:
> Regarding Jamal's post of last week concerning some of the advantages he 
> currently saw and listed
> with the current window eyes Scripting implementation over the Fs current 
> offering, I have a question from another scripter not onlist to ask here, 
> plus one of my own.
> First my friend's question:
> 
> Aside from just being yet another way to think about the
> problem at hand, what is the true advantage of object-oriented approaches in 
> this environment?  In other words, what can you do in an object-oriented 
> system, that you can not do procedurally.
> 
> And, now for my question:
> 
> Jamal, once again thinking of both scripting approaches as you know them, and 
> as they stand right now, would you care to comment as to whether, in your 
> view, the scripting model that fs has in place with jaws right now,
> holds, any, current pluses/a dvantages at all right now, either of tightness 
> of integration or procedurally,
> over the current gw model?
> with all it's caveats?
> Thanks very much.
> 
> geoff c.
> 
> 
> 
> __________ 
> View the list's information and change your settings at 
> //www.freelists.org/list/jawsscripts
> 
> 

__________?
View the list's information and change your settings at 
//www.freelists.org/list/jawsscripts

-- 
Doug Lee, Senior Accessibility Programmer
SSB BART Group - Accessibility-on-Demand
mailto:doug.lee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  http://www.ssbbartgroup.com
"While they were saying among themselves it cannot be done,
it was done." --Helen Keller
__________ 
View the list's information and change your settings at 
//www.freelists.org/list/jawsscripts

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. jawsscripts
  3. Archive
  4. 08-2008