[ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far

Hi,

Well, it would seem to me that the best way to achieve both requirements, is
to not have scripting as a primary configuration function of the screen
reader.  But instead, to create an SDK for the screen reader so that anyone
who wants to add functionality, or customise how it works, can build
relevant components to do that.  This has 3 main benefits:

1. It fits in with the modular approach being recommended for the screen
reader project.

2. It obviates the need to invent a new scripting language, or try and
incorporate one into the delivered product.

3. As the project may be .NET based, anyone wishing to alter how the screen
reader behaves will be able to use any of 32 different supported languages
to do so.  The main objective of the SDK would then be to simply provide a
means of exposing the object model, and then packaging the result in a way
that is easily distributed to the users.

Thus, end users would not need to even be aware of, or worse still
confronted with, the idea of programming in order to perform more subtle or
complex changes.  Since 99.99% of screen reader users never touch scripting,
it shouldn't be a top priority in my humble opinion.  Since most scripting
is done by comparative experts, and then distributed to a general user base,
the above SDK idea wouldn't seem to conflict with that historical use at
all.

Having some way of programmatically altering how the screen reader behaves
is definitely a good idea.  It just isn't necessary to expose that to the
main users, but rather to have it available as a fall-back option for more
experienced people.

Just my twopence.

All the best,

David


-----Original Message-----
From: ossrp-control-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ossrp-control-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sina Bahram
Sent: 28 April 2005 06:46
To: ossrp-control@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far


Hi David,
 
Those wizzards, dialogues, and macro recorders can simply implement the
scripting language by providing a frontend to it.

Take care,
Sina

________________________________

From: ossrp-control-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ossrp-control-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Lant
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 3:41 PM
To: ossrp-control@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far


Hi Jamal,
 
I think I've nailed my colours to that particular mast on another list.
<grin>  Personally, I would prefer avoiding scripting for the first line
user configuration.  I would wholeheartedly endorse an SDK for developers to
create add-ins for the screen reader down the line.  But I strongly feel
that the configuration aspect of the screen reader should be as accessible,
in the conceptual sense, to as many users as possible.  E.g. wizards,
dialogs and macro recording style features would be easiest to learn.
 

All the best, 

David 

        -----Original Message-----
        From: ossrp-control-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ossrp-control-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jamal Mazrui
        Sent: 27 April 2005 08:27
        To: ossrp-control@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Subject: [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
        
        
        One exercise I think is useful sometimes is to ask what is not
desired.  Phrased another way, what features of present Windows screen
readers do we think are not worth emulating?  I do not have ready answers to
this question myself, but thought it was worth posing, as it can help draw
boundaries around the scope of the project.
         
        Also, a topic which I do not recall being addressed specifically is
whether the screen reader should support a scripting language for
application configurations.  Is there a new scripting language for Longhorn,
a successor to VBA?  If there is a built-in scripting language, then it may
be the easiest language for the screen reader to host for configuration
scripts.  
         
        Naturally, as much configuration as possible should be implemented
without the need for scripting.  Some people may even prefer to avoid the
scripting route entirely.  Thoughts anyone?
         
        Jamal
         
         
        -----Original Message-----
        From: ossrp-control-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ossrp-control-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Will Pearson
        Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 3:02 PM
        To: ossrp-control@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
        Subject: [ossrp-control] Features So Far
        
        
        Hi,
         
        Here's my understanding of the important features that should be
investigated for version 1.  It doesn't feature everything, but then
there'll be versions after 1 in which more things can be brought in.
         
        Functional requirements:
        * ability to read *windows* login screen
        * ability to work with widely used types of applications, e.g. word
processors, spreadsheets
        * support for TTS engines that use the SAPI interface, as some of
these provide clearer speech than current formant synthesisers
        * ability to use mouse or equivalent functionality
        * must work with User Interface Automation
        * ability to update components over the web
        * support for Braille devices
         
        Architectural requirements:
        * based on .Net Framework/WinFX
        * component based architecture
         
        * Research requirements
        * investigate mechanisms to provide more efficient interaction
mechanics
        * investigate techniques to convey all the semantic information
contained within a GUI through auditory and tactual/haptech transmission
media.
        * investigate means for clearer speech
        * investigate perceptual psychology techniques for semantic
conversion of web based graphical turing tests to text
         
        Project management requirements:
        * risk analysis
        * avoid scope creep
        * requirements management
        * beta 1 to be made publically available April 2006
         
        These are fairly high level requirements, and if anyone feels
anything is being missed or would like to include anything, then say now.
         
        Will



To post to the list, send a message to: ossrp-control@xxxxxxxxxxxxx To
unsubscribe, send a message to: ossrp-control-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
and set the subject field of the message to "unsubscribe" (without the
quotes

To post to the list, send a message to:
ossrp-control@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe, send a message to:
ossrp-control-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
and set the subject field of the message to "unsubscribe" (without the quotes

Other related posts: