[ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- From: "Will Pearson" <will-pearson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <ossrp-control@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:54:03 +0100
MessageHi,
Is a scripting language really necessary? As far as I know, VBS isn't being
developed further, although it will still continue to be supported for a while
yet. The main reason that I can see for implementing a scripting language is
the ability to modify the behaviour of a specific portion of the screen
reader's execution path. With an open source project, there exists a much
better way, and that's to modify the source code itself, and as it's an open
source project, anyone can download their own sand box copy and modify the code.
Scripting languages generally tend to give you access to more coarse
functionality, which is both a good and bad thing. Sometimes you want to play
at that level of coarseness, something which access to the source code allows
you to do, but at other times you only want to make very minor changes,
something that access to the source code permits, but scripting capabilities do
not.
So, implementing a scripting language looks a lot of work for relatively minor
gains. If it was a closed source project, then it would be a good and valid
suggestion, but as it's not the returns you get from it are fairly minor.
Will
----- Original Message -----
From: Jamal Mazrui
To: ossrp-control@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 8:26 PM
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
- Follow-Ups:
- [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- From: Juan Hernandez
- References:
- [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- From: Jamal Mazrui
Other related posts:
- » [ossrp-control] Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- » [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- From: Juan Hernandez
- [ossrp-control] Re: Features So Far
- From: Jamal Mazrui