At 11:56 PM 7/4/2008, Chuck Adkins wrote:
>It's hard to believe this thread. If GW as was stated hasn't made all this
>scripting information available and has as mentioned been keeping it secret,
>where did everyone learn the information to create them in the first place?
I don't understand how my comments can get so easily blown out of
proportion. I never accused GWMicro of not putting up support
materials on Script Central. In fact, I've spent the past day
perusing scripting tutorials thanks to the resources provided on
Script Central. I should however point out that these resources were
not always available there and it was intimidating to sort through
unverified internet tutorials with mere google searches. Many GWMicro
staffers urged me to "wait like everyone else for the beta to be
released" when I tried to jump the gun by learning how to script. I
was simply unaware of where exactly the necessary documentation
resided. Not to excuse my carelessness, but I'm starting grad school
in two months, am trying to find a music notation solution to work
with Window-eyes and have to figure out the least tedious way to
relabel all the Sound Forge plugin controls whose labels disappeared
when the beta wreaked havoc with the .we file containing those field
labels. Like many long-time Window-eyes users, scripting could not
have come soon enough. There will always be a differentiation between
blind users of other people's scripts and people who feel comfortable
taking the plunge into scripting. There is also a crucial distinction
to be made between people with previous programming knowledge and
eager users with pressing needs for scripts who can neither wait for
scripts to be written nor pay someone directly to write them. I fall
into this last category. Thus far, reading various tutorials, I'm
having trouble connecting the kinds of sample situations discussed
with the kinds of tasks I'd typically want to script for Window-eyes.
These tutorials are talking about everything from HTML document text
to random number generators. I want to know how to make Window-eyes
speak certain items present on the screen but not available through
standard Windows controls, or produce custom phrases for Window-eyes
to speak when it encounters visual symbols. Thus far, the tutorials
I've been reading have not provided me these kinds of answers. I'm
slowly slogging through the code in the default global scripts, but
am having trouble figuring out what everything means.
>All one need do is look a script central and you can see that very few of
>the scripts have been created by GW. Get it? I say again, very few of the
>scripts have been created by GW Micro.
Those scripters did not learn to script exclusively using online
tutorials like Sesame Script, for example. Many of them have studied
programming and scripting languages in college or have programmed for
years as part of their work. In other words, they have the advantage
of years of previous experience that they could unleash at the drop
of a hat once scripting was introduced into Window-eyes.
>I wish some of the needless GW bashing could be done off list. How anyone
>could accuse GW of being anything but above board with anything concerning
>7.0 is way beyond me.
I don't understand why you insist on these black and white
constructs: either one supports every single GWMicro policy and
decision, or one gets accused of being a GWMicro basher. In case you
haven't noticed, GWMicro provides blind users a service for which
they pay. Many of us pay for each Window-eyes upgrade out of pocket
without any kind of state or federal support. If I'm shelling out my
hard earned money for a product, you can bet that as an informed
consumer, I'm going to raise concerns when applicable. In the case of
the manual, I was reminded of the help file containing scripting
information. I must have overlooked that in reading too fast through
the readme. However, as a Window-eyes user, I reserve the right to
express my opinions about what I see as a potentially dangerous
knowledge gap between those who already know how to script and those
who wish to learn. There are dozens of scripting related books on
Amazon.com. Only the wealthiest people could afford to buy them all
in hopes of finding them useful. At the moment, I cannot afford to
take scripting classes at a university and will probably have such a
heavy course load in the fall that it will be difficult to work in
formal scripting study, which is why I wanted to get a jump on
scripting before the beta came out. If a company ties into com
scripting, I feel that consumers have a right to request as much
beginner support as possible, given the nature of what most of us are
trying to do with Window-eyes. To be clear, no one thus far has
written a script without previous programming background, relying
exclusively on the internet tutorials found through Google searches
or on Script Central. Let's use an analogy here. In my graduate
studies, there will be course work, language and exam requirements
for earning a PHD. The exams will be composed of specific materials I
can study in order to pass. The course work will consist of readings
and papers written about those readings that will eventually add up
to a PHD. When my doctoral work actually begins, I'll have an advisor
who will help orient me toward the best research methods and field
work procedures. Why will I trust that a PHD lies at the end of all
these methods and requirements? Because others have started from the
same position as me and earned their PHD's. It then logically follows
that if I follow the trajectory of scholarship and meet its
standards, I'll earn my degree just like everyone else. Applying the
analogy to this situation, imagine if a university said they'd hire
me as a professor if I possessed a doctorate and I then began
scrambling around to figure out how to earn one. Imagine if that same
university said that it doesn't actually produce PHD scholars from
the ground up, but provides links to tutorials in case people want to
earn their degrees at home. Wouldn't I have the right to question
whether those tutorials have actually produced the result I desire?
Wouldn't it be reasonable to question whether one can learn scripting
from the ground up using those tutorials? Why is it GW bashing to
question the efficacy of a proposed system?
Orlando
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.4.5/1536 - Release Date: 7/5/2008 10:15 AM
If you reply to this message it will be delivered to the original
sender only. If your reply would benefit others on the list and
your message is related to GW Micro, then please consider sending
your message to [email protected] so the entire list will receive it.
All GW-Info messages are archived at http://www.gwmicro.com/gwinfo, and can be
searched through and sorted using the search
form at the bottom of the page.
If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include leave gw-info in the body
of the message.
