Proposed response to gnopernicus/DecTalk problem
- From: Bill Haneman <Bill Haneman Sun COM>
- To: gnome-accessibility-list gnome org
- Subject: Proposed response to gnopernicus/DecTalk problem
- Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 12:17:34 +0000
Here's my take on what we've learned so far, and my current suggestions.
I think that in the absence of a reliable means of autosensing both
braille and non-braille devices on the serial ports, we should take
Kenny's advice, and have gnopernicus make no assumptions about serial
connections. (The current defaults don't seem to be useful, and as
we've seen, can be harmful).
This would mean that Gnopernicus' default braille settings would specify
neither serial port nor braille driver (unless, possibly, we used the
BrlTTY driver as our default). When gnopernicus detects that braille
support has been enabled, by whatever means, and no serial port has been
explicitly specified, it should post a dialog notifying the user, and
allowing the user to either select serial port for the braille device or
support off again.
A similar change could be backported to the currently-UI-frozen branches
of gnopernicus, without the notification dialog, by posting the Braille
configuration UI whenever braille is turned on without explicitly
configured port settings.
In the future the braille configuration dialog could probe the serial
ports (if and when a safe method of probing become available
technically) and report its result in the dialog (i.e. "device 'Vario
80' detected on port 1" ).
The theoretical issue of USB port renumbering for braille-and-speech
users is one we will need to explore further - we don't know that this
can happen with USB serial devices, but I have seen it happen with other
USB devices such as switches, mice, and head trackers, so we should
] [Thread Prev