COMPUTER SCIENCE UPDATE - WINTER, 1996 Published By National Federation of the Blind in Computer Science President, Curtis Chong 20 Northeast 2nd Street Apartment 908 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413-2265 Phone: (612) 379-3493 Internet: chong99@cris.com ================================================================= A Message From The President by Curtis Chong, NFBCS President It has been more than a year-and-a-half since we put out our last edition of Computer Science Update. For this regrettable situation, I must, as NFBCS president, take full responsibility. Through this edition of Computer Science Update, I am announcing a change in how the newsletter will be distributed. Due to the high cost of cassette duplicating, it has been decided that Computer Science Update will be distributed only in print and via electronic mail. In addition, electronic copies of the newsletter will be placed on strategic web sites--not the least of which is the home page of the National Federation of the Blind: http://www.nfb.org. Other electronic sites where this publication may be found include NFB-NET (the electronic bulletin board of the National Federation of the Blind) and the CompuServe Disabilities Forum. Not producing the newsletter on cassette means that we can distribute more issues more often. Accordingly, the size of each issue will be somewhat smaller than those we have produced in the past. Historically, Computer Science Update has been as large as thirty print pages. I expect that we can reduce the size to something like eighteen or twenty pages. If you have any comments about the newsletter or want to submit articles, please feel free to contact me at the addresses shown above. I look forward to hearing from anyone. ================================================================= Braille Instruction On-Line: Must It Be Accessible to the Blind? by Curtis Chong The idea of providing education and instructional courses "on-line" seems to be growing in popularity almost as fast as the Internet and the Worldwide Web. The idea of taking even one course via the Internet is not without its appeal. Imagine being able to study at your own pace, on your own computer, whenever and wherever you want. Imagine being able to reach your instructor at any time via electronic mail. Imagine being able to ship your writing assignment to your instructor without having to get out of bed. Well, all of this is as appealing to the blind as it is to the sighted, and we would hope that as the number of educational opportunities "on the Net" increase, our ability to take advantage of them will keep pace with that of our sighted peers. But what happens when the course to be taught over the Internet is braille? On December 12, 1996, an announcement was sent out over the Internet about a new on-line braille course. The announcement was made jointly by the School of Education at the North Carolina Central University (Durham,NC), the Governor Morehead School for the Blind and The Shodor Education Foundation, Inc. In a nutshell, the announcement promoted something called "BRL: Braille through Remote Learning", a program funded in part by the U.S. Department of Education. Here is a brief quote from the announcement. "This program provides teachers, parents, social workers, and current/future braille transcribers with a series of three integrated online courses in braille and braille transcribing. The program is designed to offer the braille student the RIGHT INSTRUCTION (almost all aspects of braille) at the RIGHT TIME (self-paced) in the RIGHT PLACE (home or workplace). By combining electronic technologies, quality materials, and expert instructors, the program has as its goal the provision of a complete braille instructional program to all types of consumers nationwide who have an interest in some or all aspects of braille codes." Blind people who read the announcement took exception to the course requirement for a graphical web browser. The opinion was expressed that this requirement would render the course "inaccessible" to the blind. I understand that Bob Gotwals, the contact person for the course, received many impassioned notes via electronic mail on this subject. Here is an example of one note, which was posted to the EASI mailing list: ================================================================= From Jim Redman: I would like to point out that the technical requirements and course materials, as you describe them, preclude blind people who depend on speech synthesis and screen reader technology, from participating in this course. The requirement for a graphical browser, and the use of Java scripts and graphical images (which I assume are not described), are all integral, yet inaccessible parts of your course. As you are probably aware, blind people can be parents, teachers, social workers, and braille transcriptionists, and that by making your course materials inaccessible, you are effectively discriminating against the blind population. I am certain that this was not intentional, but nonetheless, that is the result and for somebody who frequents this list, I would think you would be more aware of these issues. I would also like to remind you that there are laws that protect disabled people from such things. Respectfully, Jim Rebman P.S. -- Do you plan to do anything about this situation? ================================================================= I myself wrote to Bob Gotwals in my capacity as President of the NFB in Computer Science, asking for clarification. Here is what I said: ================================================================= December 17, 1996 Mr. Bob Gotwals The Shodor Education Foundation, Inc. 923 Broad Street Suite 100 Durham, NC 27705 Dear Mr. Gotwals: My name is Curtis Chong, and I am the president of the National Federation of the Blind in Computer Science (NFBCS). This organization of blind computer professionals and lay persons works hard to ensure that blind people have equal access to computer systems and applications. I read with interest your December 17 announcement about the Braille Through Remote Learning program. Your announcement says in part: "This program provides teachers, parents, social workers, and current/future braille transcribers with a series of three integrated online courses in braille and braille transcribing...the program has as its goal the provision of a complete braille instructional program to all types of consumers nationwide who have an interest in some or all aspects of braille codes." In the section which discusses the technical capabilities program participants must have, you mention that a graphical web browser is required. Graphical web browsers imply that some, if not all, of the information that will be presented to the student is non-textual--that is, purely visual. This leads me to ask if your program is intended for persons who happen to be blind or visually impaired. The requirement for a graphical web browser implies that it is not. As I am sure you are well aware, it is not uncommon for blind people to be social workers, parents, teachers, and braille transcribers. If, as stated in your announcement, the program is intended to provide braille instruction to "all types of consumers nationwide," how will you make it possible for blind people to participate in it on an equal basis with the sighted? I would appreciate some clarification from you on this point. Yours sincerely, Curtis Chong President National Federation of the Blind in Computer Science ================================================================= Mr. Gotwals responded to me and to many others as follows: ================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 08:33:40 -0500 From: Bob Gotwals To: Chong99@cris.com, EASI@SJUVM.STJOHNS.EDU Subject: Re: Braille Online Mr. Chong, Thank you for your very kind and supportive note. Some replies are imbedded in your note. I've taken the liberty of copying the EASI group on this note. >December 18, 1996 > >Mr. Bob Gotwals >The Shodor Education Foundation, Inc. >923 Broad Street Suite 100 >Durham, NC 27705 > >Dear Mr. Gotwals: > >I have received your post to the EASI mailing list dated December >18, 1996; and I thank you for your candor on this subject. You >acknowledge in a straightforward and no nonsense manner that the >current design of the Braille Online program makes it difficult for >blind people to benefit from the course material. I wish that you >had made this clear in your original announcement so as to mitigate >some of the criticisms you have doubtless received. We couldn't agree more, and have modified our online announcement to so reflect this. Future mailings will absolutely include the appropriate statement! What a wonderful and useful suggestion. In hindsight this one should have been a "no-brainer". We consider ourselves to be intelligent folks, but sometimes common sense doesn't always prevail! > >Regardless of whether or not Braille Online will be useful to blind >computer users, the fact remains that the blind community will be >better served if more people become proficient in reading and >writing braille. We, the blind, need teachers of blind children >who believe in braille and who are competent, both in its use and >in its teaching. We need more skilled braille transcribers in >order to increase the number of braille books that we can read. >Above all, we need more people to believe in the value of braille >so that all blind children will be schooled in this vital tool of >literacy. We cannot know today whether any on-line method of >teaching braille (such as Braille Online) will help to achieve >these goals, but this should not stop people from trying to develop >new and innovative ways of teaching braille. As I may have mentioned, my foundation is NOT in the business of working for/with the blind or deaf communities. We're doing this work because of my PERSONAL interest in braille and sign language. I've been doing braille since I was 7, and it's been a love affair that has gone on now for 35 years. The opportunity to try to incorporate the work I do as a scientist and technologist with my first academic love was just too good to be true. I'm disappointed that we weren't more careful about the wording, especially regarding accessibility. If there is a braille fan club, I'm pushing to be at the front of the line! > >I am not personally convinced that blind people can learn braille >using audio output alone or, for that matter, any form of on-line >computerized instruction. Braille is, after all, a tactual "hands >on" means of reading and writing. Without hard copy braille >material or a refreshable braille display (which most of us can't >afford to begin with), how can we realistically expect someone who >is blind to learn braille? Concur. We're not sure where technology will take us, so all we can do is keep our fingers crossed that the technology will move us past the audio. We had proposed trying to incorporate a refreshable braille display capability to the course (with the assumption that prices will go down), but the funding agency didn't or couldn't include that. > >Carrying this thinking a bit further, I hope that your >instructional program will enable sighted participants to actually >feel the braille which they are learning. Instructional programs >in which braille is presented only visually (e.g., printed dots on >the screen or page) fail to reinforce the notion that braille is >first and foremost something handled by TOUCH! Most of the folks locally here who helped us test the intro course this past semester prepared their assignments on Perkins braillers. Most of them are current VI teachers, so have lots of access to braille materials in their school (most of our "guinea pigs" were Governor Morehead faculty). In short, I couldn't agree more. Even as a sighted reader, I use my fingers. > >If I were to make some specific recommendations, they would be as >follows: > >1. I think it is important that your promotional materials > clarify that Braille Online is not now accessible to the > blind. You might even take this notion a step further and > clarify that the target audience for the program consists of > sighted people who will be teaching or producing braille. Done. > >2. I would not hold out much hope that web browsers will make the > graphical world more accessible to the blind. Although web > browsers can and should be made more compatible with screen > reading systems used by the blind, accessibility to the > Worldwide Web is more readily achieved if web page designers > take the time and trouble to ensure that the design of their > web pages meets basic accessibility guidelines too numerous to > list here. > We have some of those guidelines, and will adhere to them to the maximum extent possible. We'll also be depending on the community to tell us when we fail. Within technological feasibility, we'll fix it. I don't share your feelings about web browsers, however. Perhaps I'm the eternal technology optimist! After all, didn't Bill Gates say (not too long ago either), "640K of RAM memory is all anyone will ever need"? >3. If you haven't considered doing it, provide a way for course > participants to deal with hard copy braille. Based upon what > I have read so far, it appears that course participants will > be producing braille, either with a Perkins Braille Writer or > a slate and stylus. This is eminently desirable. I wonder > how you envision having them turn in their braille > assignments. Folks who did hard copy braille mailed them to me. Worked fine. Depending on student load, we'll have local teachers here help with grading and evaluation. I DID have some folks use a piece of software that emulates a Perkins brailler. They also had a chance to use a real Perkins brailler. They were impressed with the similarities in the two. We'll continue to investigate that phenomenon. > >4. I think that some research needs to be conducted specifically > to determine how on-line computerized instruction > courses--specifically, courses to teach braille--can benefit > people who are blind. My initial notion is that no benefit > can be truly realized unless the course presents information > both audibly (via synthesized speech) and tactually (via a > refreshable braille display) at strategic points. You may > have a different concept in mind. If so, I would like to > discuss it. > Would LOVE to have that discussion. Again, the current design depends heavily on "photographs", or screen snapshots, of the monitor. On the monitor is the Perkins-emulator program that I use, which uses a special braille font. The only way we can think of now to replace those snapshots is with LARGE audio files. Unless the recipient has a high speed line, this may be problematic. >I want to thank you for taking the time to discuss this important >issue with everyone. I hope that you will not feel personally >offended by some of the comments you may have received. All of us >want more blind people reading and writing more braille, and all of >us want more and better braille instruction and transcription >services to be available to the blind community. Where we may >differ is in our respective approaches. > I have to admit that the criticism has been difficult. We should have foreseen it better, and I'm mad at myself for that. At the same time, I've been a braillist and a professional sign interpreter for a long time. A significant part of my life has been devoted to this work, so it has not been easy. We're still excited about the work, however, and are determined to do it right. I concur that we both want more and better braille instruction, and that is clearly the goal. I'm not sure our approaches are that far apart....but hopefully we've started down the path of making those differences disappear. >Yours sincerely, > >Curtis Chong >President >National Federation of the Blind > in Computer Science > ....many thanks again for your thoughtful, insightful, and instructive letter. Best wishes for a blessed and restful holiday season. After perhaps a rocky start, I'm looking forward to a long professional (electronic) relationship with you and with other EASI participants. Robert R. Gotwals, Jr. Computational Science Educator The Shodor Education Foundation, Inc. 923 Broad Street Suite 100 Durham, NC 27703 gotwals@shodor.org WWW: http://storm.shodor.org/~gotwals/gotwals.html (919) 286-1911 ================================================================= So, there you have it. I don't know how good Braille Remote Learning will turn out to be. I can't even say if it will help to increase the number of people who will know braille enough to be of help to us. What I do know is that in its present form, Braille Remote Learning is not accessible to the blind--nor is it meant to be. Can blind people benefit from braille instruction received on-line through the Internet? If the only means of receiving information we have available to us is synthetic speech, then I would say "No." If we have both synthetic speech and refreshable braille available to us, and if different information is communicated through each channel, then my answer is, "Maybe." ================================================================= MINUTES ANNUAL MEETING NATIONAL FEDERATION of the BLIND in COMPUTER SCIENCE Hilton and Towers Anaheim, California July 1, 1996 by Mike Freeman, NFBCS Secretary The 1996 annual meeting of the National Federation of the Blind in Computer Science (NFBCS) was held on July 1, 1996 during the 1996 national convention of the National Federation of the Blind (NFB) held at the Hilton and Towers hotel in Anaheim, California. The meeting was called to order by President Curtis Chong at 1:03 p.m. In his introductory remarks, he reminded all that NFBCS membership dues of $5 per year entitles members to receive the NFBCS newsletter (one was not published as of July 1, 1996). Next, President Chong introduced Richard Ring, new Director of NFB'S International Braille and Technology Center (IBTC) who spoke briefly. In his remarks, Mr. Ring stated that the IBTC was a resource to NFB members, other blind persons, agencies for the blind, etc. he said that the IBTC has virtually every Braille embosser currently on the market, computer access technology (speech and Braille) and other technologies used by the blind. he said that Persons may view/try out these technologies. He stated that in addition, the IBTC evaluates new and updated Braille embossers and screen access software and hardware for the blind. Mr. Ring concluded by thanking everyone and inviting all to visit the IBTC. The first program item was entitled "The Design (and Philosophy) Behind Screen Reader/2" and was presented by Dr. James Thatcher, Senior Programmer, Special Needs Systems, IBM Personal Software Division. He began by stating that PAL (Profile Access Language) is the key to Screen Reader/2. All functions are written in PAL; Screen Reader/2 is, in effect, a PAL interpreter. Dr. Thatcher compared PAL to JAVA, saying that, in theory, a PAL-INTERPRETER could be written for any machine. In practice, PAL code is partially compiled and partially interpreted, he said. PAL has traditional constructs such as strings, conditionals, I/O, etc. There are constructs which allow triggering of events from the keyboard as well as functions to perform tasks such as "say region", "say field", "find string", etc. He said that this scheme yields stability and flexibility. Dr. Thatcher maintained that if, given an arbitrary window and x and y ("row" and "column") coordinates, a function could be constructed that would return the character at that position, normal screen review functions could be easily implemented. This is, of course, a big "if" and is the largest problem in implementing screen review programs for the GUI environment, he said. In addition, for a useful GUI screen review program, a function to determine pixel position and font of each character as well as a way to tell what window a character falls in would have to be written, Thatcher said. In the question-and-answer period, President Chong asked about control mechanisms such as check boxes, dialog boxes and the like. Dr. Thatcher stated that in the typical GUI environment there is information available concerning the type of window one is accessing. Liz McQuarrie of Adobe Systems asked how screen review software could be written to handle displaying of multi-column text, text wrapped around graphical objects, rotated text, etc. Dr. Thatcher stated that if an Off-screen Model (OSM) was unavailable, character information could not be extracted at present. In text mode such functions as "return character" were absolute. Not so in the graphical environment; such functions as "return character", "Return window" etc. are hard to implement. In this context, "character" can include icons, he said. Thatcher said There are no plans to implement a PAL-INTERPRETER under UNIX. The next item, "Will the Blind Read PDF Documents", was presented by Liz McQuarrie, Computer Scientist, Adobe Systems, Inc. She began by explaining that Adobe Systems' "Acrobat" product allows displaying of documents in PDF format. she said that the PDF format allows electronic documents to have the "look and feel" of printed pages. There are hipertext (invisible text), tables of contents, bookmarks and the like. Ms. McQuarrie stated that such visually-rich formats as rotated text could be constructed using PDF. Screen review programs have a tough time with multi-column or rotated text, she said. Ms. McQuarrie said that Adobe's first version of a PDF-document-viewer is now available. It is a "plug-in" under Windows 3.1 (a "plug-in" is a program (DLL-FILE) loaded from Windows to implement new functionality). It is available on the World Wide Web at "http://www.adobe.com/access.html". E-mail regarding the plug-in and accessibility of PDF-formatted documents can be sent to access-b@adobe.com". Adobe tried to use the Web browser LYNX as the platform to which a PDF-to-HTML converter could be added to display PDF-documents but the authors of LYNX lost their funding, Ms. Mcquarrie said. As a consequence, Adobe is now trying a new approach: doing the HTML-to-PDF conversion on the server rather than on the client machine. This would be a seamless process to the user, she said. Three server-based solutions are contemplated. The first solution would be a plug-in to server software which would link to the PDF document and convert it to HTML. The server would then send the HTML-FORMATTED document to the local browser which would not have to understand PDF. UNIX LYNX will support this, she said. The second solution would be a proxy server to which one could point a browser; this proxy server would retrieve the PDF documents and translate them to HTML for display by the browser. UNIX LYNX does not at present support proxy servers; this solution also would not work with companies which enforce Internet access through a firewall (Web sites cannot be accessed directly through firewalls). The third solution would be a service to be implemented by Adobe, McQuarrie said. Two modes of access are contemplated: (1) an E-mail interface (one would send a message to the service giving the URL of the document to be retrieved and would get back E-mail containing an ASCII or HTML translation of the document) and (2) a forms-based interface (one would go to Adobe's Web site and enter the URL of the desired document and receive the HTML translation in return). These solutions would be available in addition to the currently-available Windows access plug-in. Ms. Mcquarrie said that Acrobat has some problems working with Netscape but that it works with Internet Explorer which uses a different technology -- ActiveX. Ms. McQuarrie said that Adobe's Acrobat accessibility plug-in does a good job of handling relatively simple documents such as memos but that more complex documents such as ads and the New York Times don't always come out well. She said that PDF poses some interesting legal questions such as copying of faxes. In response to a question from Curtis Willoughby as to whom Adobe sells, Ms. McQuarrie said that companies will purchase a package which contains "Acrobat Exchange" with more features and Acrobat Capture using an OCR engine with greater understanding of document layout and optical page recognition. Responding to the question as to whether there is a PDF-TO-ASCII file converter, Ms. McQuarrie stated that Adobe had Acquired MasterSoft which will do a file converter. Presently, however, one needs Acrobat access to convert files. The next speaker was Charles Oppermann, Program Manager, Windows Accessibility Group, Personal Systems Division, Microsoft Corporation. His topic was "The Latest on Accessibility from Microsoft." He began by saying that the Personal Systems Division no longer exists. He said that last year, a team of managers, developers, testers and marketers was deployed to tackle accessibility issues at Microsoft. Greg Lowney began the work. Mr. Oppermann sad that the Systems Group (as opposed to the Applications Group) is building in mechanisms to handle applications and make them accessible. He said that one of his tasks is to "open operating systems up a bit" in order to allow accessibility software to get the information needed for accessibility. In a humorous aside, he remarked that if people's Windows screen readers haven't crashed then they're not using them enough! He said that if one ends up at the DOS prompt, the video display driver blew up. He said that his group is aiming at robustness of software and the ability to work with print-enlarging software, PC-ANYWHERE, etc. He said that the group is now working upon accessibility features for "ActiveX". He said that ActiveX is a collection of OLE and component object models (e.g., a pie chart). Screen readers can't hope to figure such constructions out, he said. However, such programs as Excel do have the information underlying such constructions and this information can be presented in other ways, Oppermann said. This is similar to what Adobe is trying to do: dissociating visual representation from the data, he said. He said that to do this, the operating system is modified; a "DDI Redirector" is implemented to bring data to the screen reader. A flag is also implemented to indicate when a screen reader is running, Oppermann said. MS-Office-97 will be accessible and Internet Explorer is being designed to be accessible (including its toolbar). Mr. Oppermann said that with ActiveX, we will be able to access buttons of various applications. The Off-screen Model (OSM) -- a screen-object database -- gave screen readers positional information for various objects -- applications, menus, etc. -- and the OSM is now part of ActiveX. He said that Internet Explorer has keyboard access to all objects and has "smart Alt-tag handling". Features are being included to make various aspects of Web pages more accessible and some special tags have been implemented at the request of RFB&D to make tabular data more accessible. Oppermann said the second Beta is being released this week (July 1-7). He said that Internet Mail and News will have the same controls as Internet Explorer. He said that Microsoft has no plans to develop a screen reader and that screen reader vendors should cooperate with Microsoft to develop their products. However, things could change, he said. He said that Microsoft will do what ever it takes to make its products accessible. He said that his Internet address is "chuckop@microsoft.com" and that the Web site for accessibility information is "http://www.microsoft.com/windows/enable.html". In response to a question regarding the problem of applications not using "standard" Windows functions, Mr. Oppermann said that in reality, there were no rules as to how to draw things; applications can use low-level functions to construct objects themselves or they can use high-level functions. Microsoft recommends that to achieve accessibility, applications should use the highest-level functions possible. He said that Microsoft Office didn't take into account use by people with disabilities. He said that Microsoft could not force accessibility. Asked if Microsoft will abandon Windows-95 in favor of Windows-NT, Oppermann said that Windows-NT was a high-end windows product for NT workstations and NT servers; that Microsoft would not stop supporting Windows 95 and that, in fact, Microsoft will continue to support Windows 3.1 which is still selling well. Following this presentation, President Chong convened the business meeting of the NFB in Computer Science. The minutes of the 1995 NFBCS meeting were read and approved as read. The Treasurer's report was given and approved. The balance as of June 30, 1995 was $1,066.40. The balance as of July 1, 1996 was $993.61. Next, elections were held and the following were elected for 2-year terms: Curtis Chong, President; Steve Jacobson, Vice-president; Mike Freeman, Secretary; Susie Stanzel, Treasurer; Curtis Willoughby, Member, Board of Directors; Richard Ring, Member, Board of Directors and Lloyd Rasmussen, Member, Board of Directors. Brian Buhrow said those who want to receive the Braille Monitor via E-mail should contact him. President Chong announced that there are plans to make NFB-NET available via the Internet by early fall. One will be able to Telnet into NFB-NET and NFB'S Fidonet conferences, NFB-TALK and Blindtalk, will be made available as E-mail lists (listserves). The business meeting was adjourned at 3:42 p.m. The next presentation was entitled: "CompuServe and the Blind: Present and Future Access" and was presented by Cristine Morris, District Marketing Manager for the Southwest, CompuServe. In his introductory remarks, President Chong said that CompuServe was switching to the HMI protocol and implementing Internet browsing with Netscape, Internet Explorer and the like. He said that those using ASCII interfaces to access CompuServe were quite concerned. Ms. Morris said that CompuServe is having to adapt to change and the Internet and that it is difficult to address the needs of all its members. She said that CompuServe needs to keep its services accessible to everyone. She said that CompuServe was looking at implementing audio chat, voice-mail and audio-reception of E-mail. She said that CompuServe looked for an audio access product partner and that Henter-Joyce's JAWS for Windows (JFW) program fit CompuServe's need. She said that an ASCII interface would still be supported in the Disabilities Forum. Following her remarks, there was a demonstration of CompuServe's WinCIM access program working with JFW. Following this, President Chong stated that the blind were not happy that they had not been consulted before such a major change in accessibility was undertaken; that, in addition to working with vendors, CompuServe should work with the NFB (the blind being the ultimate experts on blindness and the alternative techniques of blindness) and that CompuServe should work with other screen reader vendors besides Henter-Joyce to assure accessibility of its services using screen readers besides JFW. In response, Ms. Morris said that she and her colleagues would take a message back to CompuServe to work with NFB and other screen reader vendors but that she hoped that Netscape and other such browsers would become accessible. President Chong responded that it does no good if David Andrews is a section-leader of the Disabilities Forum if his (Mr. Chong's) ASCII access is taken away. He said that he paid for the CompuServe service in good faith, expecting to receive access. The "higher levels" don't quite "get it"; they don't understand the impact the decision to abandon an ASCII interface will have. He said that a message should go back to Dave Eastburn, Kent Stuckey and Bob Massey that the blind are not happy with the direction CompuServe is taking and that, above all else, CompuServe should start to work with NFB. If this does not happen, he warned, CompuServe would have "a lot of mad blind people on its doorstep". Ms. Morris said she understood; that part of the problem was that providers of material to CompuServe were changing their content format to HTML and concluded by saying somewhat ruefully, "Thanks I guess." The next agenda item was a presentation entitled: "Blind People Transitioning to Windows: Personal Experiences". Presenters were Susie Stanzel, Computer Programmer-Analyst, Farm Service Agency, U.S. Department of Agriculture; Darrell Shandrow, Computer Instructor, Colorado Center for the Blind; and Steve Shelton, Senior Systems Engineer, ALLTEL Information Services. President Chong introduced Mr. Shandrow by saying that he was a blind person who, unlike many in the room, had "jumped with both feet" into the Windows environment and was having considerable success in mastering it. Mr. Shandrow said that he obtained help to learn Windows concepts. He said that he has helped many people obtain jobs which were not doable without the ability to work in the Windows environment. He says that he does a lot of "hacking" (experimentation) to get Windows applications to talk satisfactorily. Mr. Shelton said that he used standard 3270-emulation software until his company went to Windows. He said that his vision is deteriorating. He said that he initially worked with Windows Master but recently has become sold upon JAWS for Windows. He says that JFW'S extensive use of macros has been a great help to him. He has been using the product for 2 to 3 months. He said that he should have gone straight to speech; that LP-Dos was more trouble than it was worth. He is a real Windows advocate and does not believe that the GUI implies inaccessibility for the blind. He said that many applications share a common dialogue and he feels that Windows is far better than DOS. The future is bright, he concluded. Susie Stanzel said she had not had as uplifting an experience as had Mr. Shelton. Like Mr. Shelton, she is a mainframe programmer, she said. She began her career in the era of punch cards and has witnessed constant change in the computing environment -- first using ROSCO terminals and then 3270 terminals. She got an LED-120 Braille terminal and went to a Honeywell mainframe system; all worked well. She said she moved back to IBM machines, discovering she couldn't work with System 36's. She shifted to screen readers for screen access. She had never encountered a full-screen editor before, she said. She first used Artic speech, then Provox. Three years ago, her shop went to Windows, she said. She stayed with MS-DOS for two years. She said that a year ago, everyone around her got Windows. She became convinced she would have to do likewise as everyone was now getting his/her mail using Windows. Ms. Stanzel said she first tried Artic WinVision, then talked to Chuck Hallenbeck who used JFW and finally went to the NFB of Oklahoma convention where she met Steve Shelton. She got JFW in April. She bought the book "Opening Windows" and "Windows from the Keyboard". She went through the JFW tutorials, taking notes on her DOS system, she said. She said that macros are the secret to JFW'S success. She is making the final jump into Windows. She is now on a 60-day detail in the EEO office. It's a chance to get into databases and reporting. She said she has had a terrible transition from MS-DOS to Windows. She now has a Romeo Braille printer and has Brailled out all the JFW macros; this has helped her to learn the macro language. The hardest things to write macros for, she concluded, were "Info-mappings" in which 3-line descriptions on the left hand side of the screen described material on the right hand side of the screen. In response to a question from Paul McIntyre, Ms. Stanzel said pull-down menus behaved well most of the time. Lloyd Rasmussen remarked that in his experience, about the only programs that obeyed the standard Alt-F Windows keyboard command were kids programs. He remarked that coworkers are amazed how fast things can be done from the keyboard (as opposed to using rodents). The final agenda item was "Access to Windows/NT: the Only Solution" and was presented by Albert Melissen, Software Engineer, Biolink Computers R&D Ltd. Mr. Melissen began by stating that Biolink develops Windows/NT screen readers for the workplace, not the home environment. He said that there are often hundreds of workstations, each with preset applications. NT'S biggest plus and its biggest problem is its "C-2 Security", he said. NT places walls between users and is almost impossible to hack, he said. Programs trying to look at and/or modify the operating system (as screen readers must) are seen by NT as a virus and get terminated with a "protection violation fault". Melissen said it took quite a while to get past this. NT is preemptive unlike Windows 3.1, he said. It does not allow jobs which assume full control of the CPU (as screen readers must in order to synchronize with the other operations of the computer). If a screen reader needs to know the order and time of events, NT does not allow it, he said. Biolink had to scrap its Windows 3.1 screen reader and write a completely new program although it is backward-compatible. What was nice, he said, was that it took very little work to support Windows/NT Version 4. Biolink plans to ship this program at the same time Microsoft ships Version 4. The screen reader is tailored specifically to each installation, Melissen said. In response to a question from David Andrews why Biolink's program carries such a hefty price tag, Mr. Melissen said that the program was expensive to develop. In response to another question, Mr. Melissen said that Biolink is working on supporting more applications and that if a customer has a custom made application that is not supported, Biolink will write the support--for a fee. President Chong asked what blind persons can now run under NT. Mr. Melissen said the screen reader has been tested with Visual C-Plus-plus, MS-Word, Windows-terminal, (VT-100-EMULATION) and NT'S Telnet, among other programs. He said that Biolink had developed an external keypad for control which plugs into a serial port to avoid keyboard takeovers. Netscape and Internet Explorer are being worked on and ActiveX support is being developed. He said that X-emulators are being worked on and that "Excursion" is shipping. He also said that their screen reading software and sound cards will outrun an external synthesizer in fast PC'S. He concluded by giving his CompuServe I.D.: 72604,367. President Chong adjourned the meeting at 5:27 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Mike Freeman Secretary National Federation of the Blind in Computer Science ================================================================= Letter to CompuServe by Curtis Chong As can be seen from the preceding article, CompuServe sent a representative to the 1996 meeting of the NfB in Computer Science-- one Cristine Morris, CompuServe's District Manager for the Southwest. The bulk of the presentation was taken up with a demonstration by Henter-Joyce, makers of JAWS for Windows, showing how that screen reading system could be used to access CompuServe using CompuServe's own WinCIM program. It was clear to all present that the bulk of the work to make WinCIM accessible had been done by Henter-Joyce and that CompuServe was capitalizing on this opportunity to prove that its service was indeed accessible to the blind. Federationists expressed a good deal of concern and frustration with CompuServe, saying that it was in fact doing little to ensure that blind people--some of whom had been long time CompuServe subscribers--would continue to be able to use the service in light of the changes being announced by CompuServe. We were assured that the CompuServe Disabilities Forum would continue to be accessible via the traditional ASCII interface. Shortly after the meeting, a press release was distributed by CompuServe and Henter-Joyce, announcing a joint relationship between the two companies. The purpose of the relationship was to make CompuServe accessible to the blind. Again, CompuServe was capitalizing on the work of Henter-Joyce. I felt that the time had come for me to write a letter to Ms. Morris in an attempt to clarify our position with respect to CompuServe. Here it is. July 15, 1996 Cristine Morris District Marketing Manager for the Southwest CompuServe, Inc. Dear Ms. Morris: I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for speaking at the 1996 meeting of the National Federation of the Blind in Computer Science, held in Anaheim, California on Monday, July 1. I have waited this long to write you to ensure that what I say in this letter is not unduly colored by some of the strong feelings that were expressed at the meeting; for as you know, people expressed some frustration and annoyance with CompuServe for not taking more direct action to ensure that blind people have full and equal access to its services. To begin with, I wish to commend you personally for taking time from your busy schedule to come to our meeting and tell us about CompuServe's plans for its blind customers. I was glad to meet you personally. I trust that the messages we asked you to pass along to the management of CompuServe were transmitted. As you recall, the majority of the time allotted to your presentation was devoted to a demonstration by Henter-Joyce of its JAWS for Windows screen reading software and the impressive tailoring that it has done to enable that software to work with CompuServe's WinCIM program. I and many others were impressed--more with the work of Henter-Joyce than with any effort on CompuServe's part to ensure accessibility to its services. After the meeting, many people came to me and expressed the belief that CompuServe was exploiting the work of Henter-Joyce by taking credit for making its services accessible to the blind while doing very little to modify its WinCIM program to ensure accessibility. Others expressed the view that it was not good enough simply for CompuServe to assure us that we would continue to have access to its Disability Forum through the ASCII interface, pointing out that this forum is only a fraction of the services used by the blind via this interface. To be frank, given what has happened so far, I find myself in agreement with these views. Let me be clear about what I am saying here. I think that it is a good thing for CompuServe and Henter-Joyce to be working together to ensure accessibility to CompuServe by people who are blind. Although I believe that the bulk of the technical work to facilitate this access was performed by Henter-Joyce with only passive cooperation from CompuServe, the fact is that there is an unprecedented relationship between CompuServe and an access technology vendor of products for the blind--a relationship that should continue. Nevertheless, CompuServe must not exclude the possibility that another vendor of screen reading software for the blind will want to enter into a similar relationship. CompuServe must afford other companies this opportunity. After all, JAWS for Windows is only one of the screen reading systems used by the blind to work in the Windows environment. We should not be forced to purchase JAWS for Windows simply to access CompuServe. Ideally, we should be able to use the Windows screen reading system of our choice. In addition, future releases of the WinCIM program must not diminish our ability to use CompuServe. In recent announcements, CompuServe has made clear its intention to allow access to its services using traditional Internet browsers. Blind people today are only beginning to use Netscape and similar graphically-capable web browsers. More popular is the text-only LYNX browser. Even for those blind people who are using Netscape, a particular web page can be rendered useless by displaying graphical objects without any accompanying text. If blind people are to have access to CompuServe through the Internet, CompuServe must work to ensure that its web pages contain enough text so as to make them useful to blind CompuServe customers. So far, nothing has been said in this regard, neither by you nor by any public announcements I have read. Regarding the ASCII interface, which was a key factor in attracting many blind people to CompuServe in the first place, I recognize that CompuServe must move toward a more graphical, Windows-oriented presentation in order to survive in a highly competitive market. Nevertheless, CompuServe must understand that for many blind people today, the ASCII interface is infinitely preferable to what is available through Windows. True, change being inevitable, this will not remain so indefinitely. Eventually, Windows will become a platform on which blind people can do real, productive, and satisfying work. There will come a time when blind people will feel comfortable with and perhaps embrace the WinCIM interface. In the meantime, as CompuServe's ASCII interface continues to devolve when compared to the more recent enhancements to its service, it is inevitable that some blind CompuServe customers will feel frustrated and cheated. This can be mitigated somewhat if CompuServe works closely with organizations representing blind people--organizations such as the National Federation of the Blind. Again, thank you very much for taking the time to speak at our meeting. I have tried to be as candid, positive, and forthright as I can. I hope we can begin to build a constructive and productive relationship between the National Federation of the Blind and CompuServe. Yours sincerely, Curtis Chong President National Federation of the Blind in Computer Science Internet: chong99@cris.com cc: Kent Stuckey, Vice President CompuServe Ventures, Inc. Dave Eastburn, Vice President Product Planning and Development CompuServe, Inc. Robert Massey President and Chief Executive Officer CompuServe, Inc. David Andrews Section Leader CompuServe Disability Forum Section 5 (vision impairment) Ted Henter, President Henter-Joyce, Inc. THE END