>Yes, you are right that speech is a more popular option than
>braille--at least here in the States. This is primarily due to the
>fact that braille displays are prohibitively expensive for the
>average person, and that braille is not being taught as much as it
>maybe should be in the public schools.
Rachel,
I agree with all you said, but I believe there are at least two
other reasons why speech access seems to dominate in our country.
First of all, a large percentage of blind people have lost their
sight as adults, and although many of us long for the braille
skills some of you demonstrate, it's simply beyond our ability to
gain the same level of competence! Many of us suffer from a
diminished sense of touch, often the result of diabetic
neuropathy, while others simply missed that critical period that
must exist for learning skills such as braille reading.
Therefore, even though we do use braille for many things,
we couldn't possibly use it as efficiently for computer access as
we can speech.
Another reason I believe speech is the preferred method of screen
access for some of us is, I honestly believe we comprehend at a
higher rate information gathered via our ears! I also believe
that some people benefit more from tactile input, many good
braille readers confirming this when we've discussed it, just as
most sighted people will claim they learn best from visual
materials, but I, for one, can state that I have always
comprehended text better when listening to it rather than
performing the visual act of reading it myself! Again, some
sighted people have told me that just the opposite is the case
for them, and some good braille readers have told me that by far,
their comprehension is best through the pinkies, but for me, the
ears have always yielded the best results, no doubt about it!
Then again, maybe all any of us is doing is defending that method
most familiar to us, and as long as it keeps working, who cares
how we get the job done? <grin>
Willie
Net-Tamer V 1.09.2 - Registered
|