* Original Area: NETMAIL
* Original From: Visually.Impaired.Pittsburgh.Area.C (99:1/1)
* Original To  : root:nfb-talk@echogate (1:282/1045)
From: Visually.Impaired.Pittsburgh.Area.Computer.Enthusiasts!@visi.com
Subject: Using telnet in the GUI environments. (Forward)
I've recently heard of Kermit 95 which is a possible solution to the
issue of terminal and telnet access.  There are versions for Win 95, Win
NT, and Warp.  Connections may be made via modem or tcp/ip and 26
terminal emulations are available.  Commands can be issued and it uses a
text based console and keys may be re-mapped easily.  I haven't tried it
with a screen reader, but it ought to be worth a try.  Check out :
http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/  and
http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/whatsnew.html and report on how it works
with screen access.
-- Mark
Visually Impaired Pittsburgh Area Computer Enthusiasts!
Success isn't how far you got,
but the distance you traveled
from where you started.
vipace@trfn.pgh.pa.us
On Thu, 20 Feb 1997, Darrell Shandrow wrote:
> Greetings colleagues,
>
> This article addresses the problem of using text-based telnet programs in a
> GUI environment.  As blind computer users, we face special challenges when
> using these text-based programs in a non-text-based environment where all
> the "standard" DOS stuff is out the window.  Here are some of my
> perspectives on the situation.  Please feel free to start some lively
> discussion of these topics.
>
> Traditionally, us blind folks have used the Internet via text-based Unix
> shell accounts.  We ran DOS-based terminal emulation programs like Procomm,
> Telix and Commo.  All the prompts and text was spoken automatically because
> it was written through the BIOS using DOS calls.  This fact, along with
> robust screen reading software, made it fairly straightforward to use many
> Internet services such as E-mail, telnet, ftp, irc, lynx and anything else
> one could use in Unix.  If you heard too much information at one time
> automatically, you could silence your speech and use screen review 
ommands.
>
> When we used irc to chat with users or telnet to access bulletin board
> systems, we actually required the text to be written through DOS BIOS so
> that we had automatic speech regardless of our screen reader.  This worked
> extremely well and the use of these two Internet services almost always
> went smoothly.
>
> Now, the Internet; and all other computer applications; are moving to the
> GUI platforms like Windows, OS/2 and Macintosh.  These platforms have
> varying degrees of accessibility and it is possible to do many things just
> as well as a sighted user.  One can even utilize screen access software in
> Windows to browse the Web with Netscape, Internet Explorer or just about
> any other GUI web browser.  One can easily use Eudora to read and send
> electronic mail.  However, current experience indicates that terminal
> emulation is still a problem.
>
> It is actually quite possible to use terminal emulation under Windows in
> various job situations where the applications are specifically programmed
> using macros to allow the blind employee (usually a customer service rep)
> to obtain necessary information.  Automatic speech is not required and,
> usually, undesirable in these situations.  So, this is not exactly what I
> am addressing here.
>
> I am talking about the use of a terminal emulation interface like telnet to
> access other computers on the Net interactively.  The various GUI-based
> telnet clients have various problems with accessibility when it comes to
> the interactive speaking of information.  These problems are due to the
> fact that there is no such thing as BIOS calls in a GUI.  Text is scrolled
> to the screen and it is up to the screen reader to figure out how to speak
> it well.  This is fine for standard controls like dialog boxes and menus
> because the information is fairly specific and predictable.  Due to the
> nature of Windows controls, the screen readers seem to have an easier time
> dealing with these things.
> However, scrolling text from an interactive connection is much less
> predictable and screen readers don't perform well.  Since it is unlikely
> that there will ever be anything similar to BIOS calls in the GUI
> environments, I propose the following choices to solve the interactivity
> problems:
>
> Text-based telnet client:
> A text-based telnet client could be written to work much like the FTP
> client that comes with Windows '95.  The FTP program is text-based and
> works extremely well in a DOS box with a DOS screen reader.  Similarly, a
> telnet client could be written that uses the Windows '95 (or other GUI)
> networking resources.  This client should have solid VT100 and ansi-bbs
> emulation and support file transfers with Zmodem and kermit.  Ideally, it
> should be able to do an rlogin when that situation is required.
>
> Another possible solution would be to write a program that could use the
> GUI's built-in networking resources to emulate a standard DOS packet
> driver.  This would work like the cslip and slipper drivers currently
> available.  If this were done, programs like Minuet and NCSA telnet could
> be used in a DOS box.  It would allow for some flexibility.
> If this solution were adopted, the packet drivers should be non-obtrusive
> so that one could still use their Windows Internet applications like
> Netscape even when the DOS client is running.
>
> The final solution I will suggest is to emulate a virtual com port so that
> one could use a DOS-based terminal emulator like Procomm or Commo over a
> telnet connection.  I am not certain how this one could work, because you
> would need to have a way to specify the address of the host to which you
> wanted to connect.  If this solution were adopted, one could use whichever
> program they liked and have complete functionality when connecting to a BBS
> or attempting some other interactive text-based session.
>
> I feel that this is extremely important, since shell accounts are becoming
> less and less available.  It will be very useful if a blind person who has
> only a PPP connection can still use their computer to connect to services
> like GBX and NfbNet.
>
> I hope this generates some lively discussion and some real solutions.  
Thanks.
>
> Regards,
>
> Darrell Shandrow                      [http://www.qfi.org]
> Technology Specialist, Colorado Center for the Blind
> I am not representing the CCB.  This is just me...
> Changing what it means to be blind every day and in every way!
>
>
---
--- Maximus/2 2.02
---------------