Or - don't throw the towel so hastily...
Precisely as Catherine Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, on the
issue of even non-"graphical" accessibility:
> It's just a matter of taking the time to include these features initially
> rather than afterwards when it is much harder.
BTW, some days ago I looked at /dsdp/ and couldn't find the experimental
item. Could you repeat the URL, or put it up again if it's withdrawn ?
In the meantime though I droodle around the idea; for instance, *must*
a "GUI" be "(pixel-)graphical" in all aspects, and under all conditions?
I remember having seen - years ago - a really well done "shell" screen
which didn't have this typical "old-fashioned" letter-"graphical" surface
at all, nor his (unpleasant) "SAA". It used colour areas, a nice
arrangement of boxes with pop-up (sub-)menues when clicked with a mouse
(yes, indeed!), though letters were evidently in the unit's text-mode
font. But it was definitely sort of a DOS-shell.
It was on a machine in someone's office, and I had no occasion to get
any details about it.
// Heimo Claasen // <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> // Brussels 1999-09-03
HomePage of ReRead - and much to read ==> http://www.inti.be/hammer
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
