[brailleblaster] Re: Thoughts on the Specification

  • From: "qubit" <lauraeaves@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 12:29:53 -0600

If you change the default key bindings on each platform, the docs should update 
as well. I don't think that would be difficult.  In fact, I have a thought for 
the docs: if the user changes the key bindings, then I think the docs should 
automatically update as well.  Is this done in any other software?  Well, it 
was just a thought...
--le

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Michael Whapples 
  To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 11:09 AM
  Subject: [brailleblaster] Re: Thoughts on the Specification


  I would say keybindings should be platform specific, particularly for the Mac 
as it has keys which other platforms don't have (eg. command and option). Also 
if key bindings weren't wisely chosen if they were the same for all platforms 
then there could be conflicts with platform specific ones (eg. the web mail 
interface for aim.com email has ctrl+alt+d defined for a shortcut to delete 
message but on gnome this is taken by the desktop for show desktop, therefore 
on linux I cannot use the aim.com shortcut key).


  However this is easily accommodated as if key bindings can be customised by 
users then we can ship a different configuration depending on the platform the 
build of BrailleBlaster is for.


  Michael Whapples

  On 10 Dec 2010, at 17:09, Alex Jurgensen wrote:


    Hi John G.,


    I agree with having a user friendly site for updating tutorials. However, 
Windows and Linux help systems may have a feature like we have on the Mac, 
where the help system is self-updating.


    About UI changes, while Eclipse handles a lot of the UI changes that we 
would need to make to make the UI look native, I have sited several examples 
where we may need to make adjustments, such as the "Exit" menu item, which 
exists on the Mac in a menu that does not exist on any other Platform to my 
knowledge, unless you cont some distributions of Linux.


    Eclipse may handle some of this by default, so I do think that we can 
safely use SWT to handle most of the UI differences automatically.


    My point was that we should integrate the small tweaks that Eclipse does 
not handle automaticallly into Braille Blaster.


    Regarding Key Bindings, should we not taylor those to the various 
platforms. The OS's system-wide keyboard shortcuts should be respected in my 
opinion.


    Let me know hwat you think.


    Regards,
    Alex,




    On 2010-12-10, at 8:48 AM, John Gardner wrote:


      I propose answers to the first two of John's questions.  
      1. I do believe that the user should be able to change key bindings, for
      lots of reasons.  And the ones in the spec wiykd be the defaults.  None 
are
      cast in stone - I undoubtedly made a few mistakes.
      2. If I understand correctly, the "look and feel" on the different OS
      platforms are controlled to a large extent by SWT, so why not just use it
      without a lot of tweaking?  
      3. I really don't understand much about changing the appearance of
      applications, so I won't give an opinion on how much the user can/should 
be
      able to do.  However I hope that we won't agree on anything that is a 
major
      complication.

      A few other comments.  I agree more or less with John B that we should 
keep
      UI changes to a minimum.  As a Windows user I know that many applications 
do
      not put recent documents list at the end of the file menu, and it would
      hardly be a problem for anybody if there were a "recent documents item 
there
      instead.  Preferences are not at all standard.  In fact I don't recall 
ever
      seeing preferences in the edit menu.  I've seen it in the file menu, in 
the
      help menu, in the tools menu, and in other places too.  If it is more
      standard in other OS, I'm happy to follow their lead.

      Finally I am also happy to have help file as part of BrailleBlaster.  It
      would be good if we could have a user-friendly update site so that people
      could easily get updates to tutorial and help files.

      John G



      -----Original Message-----
      From: brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
      [mailto:brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John J. Boyer
      Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 11:24 PM
      To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
      Subject: [brailleblaster] Re: Thoughts on the Specification

      We have three questions that need to be resolved.

      1. Should the user be able to change key bindings? If so, the keystrokes 
      given in the spec would be the default. 

      2. What aspects of BrailleBlaster's appearance should be changed from 
      one platform to another.

      3. How much should the user be able to change BrailleBlaster's 
      appearance? 

      I think it would be helpful to look at how Eclipse deals with these 
      matters.

      The idea of context menus was that there should be a context menu for 
      the Daisy view and the Braille view, with things peculiar to that view.

      I think the spec should be reworded to make things clearer. The Daisy 
      and Braille views should be called that, not windows. It should be 
      stated that the welcome "screens" will be dialog boxces. It should also 
      be stated that the print and emboss previews will be large dialog boxes. 
      Finally, it should be stated explicitly that BrailleBlaster will have a 
      top window containing the title bar, the menus and the status bar and 
      that the Braille and Daisy views will be child windows of this top-level 
      window. If the user has more than one document opoen, The views will 
      change according to which document is being viewed. Various menu items 
      may also be grayed out or inversely.

      BrailleBlaster will use the printing widget of SWT. This works with CUPS 
      on Linux and the Mac and with the printer dialogs on Windows. Embosser 
      dirvers, including the ViewPlus drivers, should interface with the 
      printing widget, not print directly on the platform. This may require 
      some revision of the drivers, but it is necessary for platform 
      independence. Some Java code may be written to manage the interface.

      The Mac is used with all kinds of proprietary software that does 
      printing. I don't think we have to worry about paying for CUPS. 

      John B.

      On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 09:11:44PM -0800, Alex Jurgensen wrote:

        Hi John,



        Apple aquired the CUPS project, so the requirements for using it in paid

      drivers may have changed.



        The Mac also uses CUPS for its printing system.



        Regards,

        Alex,





        On 2010-12-09, at 5:34 PM, John Gardner wrote:



          The specs say that a user should be able to maximize either the DAISY 
or

          Braille view to cover the other.  Or put them side by side.



          On another topic - there has been some discussion about printer 
drivers.

      It

          should be straightforward to use ViewPlus printer/embossers with the

      Windows

          version of BrailleBlaster.  All ViewPlus printer/embosser users have

      Tiger

          ttf fonts installed, and it should be easy to set up a template so 
that

      the

          right ones are being used to tell the ViewPlus machine which character

      to

          print and which to emboss.  Otherwise, BrailleBlaster is just another

          Windows ap and should print/emboss just fine.  However I personally

      don't

          know much at all about printing with Mac or Linux.  I have been told

      that

          CUPS is what one should use for Linux.  I remember reading about CUPS

      many

          years ago, and all I remember is that it is GPL-licensed and that the

          license fee for use in a commercial non-GPL printer driver is many

      thousands

          of dollars per year.  So what is another way?



          John G







          Original Message-----

          From: brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

          [mailto:brailleblaster-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of qubit

          Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 9:09 AM

          To: brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

          Subject: [brailleblaster] Re: Thoughts on the Specification



          I think that the daisy and braille windows/views/whatever you call 
them 

          should be resizeable and draggable, like the spec said.  As long as 
the 

          dialog windows are accessible, there is no need to customize them.

          The main window should be as large as it can be on each platform.

          My opinions.

          I think that since the user can resize and drag the D&B windows, 
he/she 

          should be able to maximize one of them to cover the other, so as to 
see

      the 

          full context in that document.

          Anyone comments?

          --le



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

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

          To: <brailleblaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

          Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 8:33 AM

          Subject: [brailleblaster] Re: Thoughts on the Specification





          Another question we need an answer to: How much should the user be

          allowed to customize the appearance of BrailleBlaster?



          John



          On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 06:07:40AM -0800, Alex Jurgensen wrote:

            Hi,



            Well, you saved me a great deal of typing.



            I was going to point out the menu bar situation on platforms like 
OS X 

            which have a system menu bar. I've seen this talked about fro some

      setups 

            of Ubuntu, althought I've never seen the latter in practice.



            Thanks for getting to this task first.



            Regards,

            Alex,





            On 2010-12-09, at 1:59 AM, 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>

                      To:<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











            Alex Jurgensen,

            VoiceOver Trainer,

            ASquared21@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



            Visit us on the web at: 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 



        Visit us on the web at: 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 


    Visit us on the web at: www.vipbc.org



Other related posts: