             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 <jrebman@netcom.com>

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 <gotwals@SHODOR.ORG
Subject:      Re: Interest in On-line Braille Course
To:           Multiple recipients of list EASI
     <EASI@SJUVM.STJOHNS.EDU

To Jim and others on this list....

We are VERY aware of the fact that the current design of the
braille online folks makes it difficult for blind individuals to
participate easily.  This is a three year program....Years one and
two are concerned with developing and pilot testing the curriculum,
and experimenting with the use of current and emerging technologies
to try to think of new ways of presenting braille education.  If
you read the grant proposal
(http://www.shodor.org/braille/grant/braillegrant.html), you will
notice that we intend, once the courses are pilot-tested, to ensure
that all of the materials are 100% accessible.  We had asked the
granting agency for funding to do this earlier, but this portion of
the request was not funded.  What WAS funded was the money to
develop the materials and to investigate the use of advanced
technologies, such as JAVA and VRML, in the teaching of braille.

What we are COUNTING on is that the improvements in Web browsers
for blind folks by others who are being funded by the Federal
government (and other agencies) will make our additional task of
ensuring accessibility that much easier.  Yes, there are a number
of things that we can do early on, such as make liberal and clever
use of ALT tags for images.  We're not sure yet how we're going to
handle the heavy use that we make of screen snapshots, but we're
working on it.  We THINK we'll be able to go a long way towards
100% accessibility from the early stages.

What are our options?   If there is the demand that the course be
100% accessible from Day One, our option might be:  we can't do
that at this stage of the game, either for the amount of money
awarded us by the granting agency and/or because of technical
limitations.  In other words, we don't even try, give the money
back.  If folks are willing to give us the time we need to develop
the course, work on the technological advancements, get bugs out,
and wait/work with others who are looking to improve browsers, then
perhaps everyone wins.

I've worked in the VI field as a braillist/teacher for almost 35
years.  My masters degree is in education of the hearing-impaired
from the National Technical Institute for the Deaf, I taught at
Gallaudet, am fluent in sign language.  I am WELL-AWARE of all the
issues concerning accessibility, and we thought a lot about this
issue early on (and is why we asked for the additional funding to
make it happen!).

This braille ed program is, by the way, part of a larger VI masters
degree program that is being developed at North Carolina Central
University.  The idea is to make a large part of that program
accessible over the net, and the braille course is the first test
of that concept.  We sure would like a chance to make it
work....again, if there is a demand that the effort be made to
ensure 100% accessibility in the experimental phase, we can pretty
much ensure that the experiment will fail.

Tell us what to do.  The Foundation that I work for is a group of
computational scientists and educators -- we do chemistry and
physics on high-performance computers.  We want to do this work
because we think it's important, because we think we have something
to offer, and because we care deeply about the community.  Our
original budget proposal was HALF of what we were awarded -- the US
Department of Education felt so strongly that this work was
important that they asked us to look at new technologies as well as
design the series of courses.  As computational scientists, we
think we can take some of the techniques that we use on a daily
basis to do science to the problem of helping folks understand
braille better. Hopefully, we'll have a chance to figure that out,
THEN deal with the problem(s) of accessibility.

Looking forward to a REASONED and REASONABLE discussion of these
issues.

=================================================================

I wrote back to Mr. Gotwals as follows:

=================================================================

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.

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.

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?

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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Yours sincerely,

Curtis Chong
President
National Federation of the Blind
             in Computer Science

=================================================================

Mr. Gotwals responded to me fairly quickly.  He chose to
intersperse his responses within the original text of my letter,
which is a common practice these days when communicating via
electronic mail.  Here is the response:

=================================================================

Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 08:00:50 -0500
From: Bob Gotwals <gotwals@shodor.org>
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
