[Blindmath] mathplayer, jaws, and math in graphics?

Sun Apr 3 22:57:21 UTC 2011

In the end, what needs to happen for math to be made accessible is to
make sure we can use the same source as everyone else, either that, or
we invent some super scanning/OCR software that is free and can deal
with any image in any webpage, and render it accurately in our
preferred format.
We may, some day, may be get that level of programming accuracy,
though I really do not see how, InftyReader does a great job in many
aspects, but it is costly (and I know  it is expensive to make, so I
am not complaining about it, just pointing it out) and cannot deal
with images in very bad resolution, and I doubt any software would.
Until just ecently this was pretty much the only way to display math
on the web, LaTeX could be put into alt tags to make them accessibe,
to a point, but it requires all blind people to know LaTeX, and let us
not forget that this is an English based type setting language that
may come much more naturally to English speaking people than those
from other countries, plus all the cons that have already been pointed
out. I could create a bunch of macros I understand, but putting the
source code refering to them as an alt tag on a page, I doubt it would
be useful to anyone.
And so we come to MathML and its accessible implementation.
MathML is a standard that allows people to use xml (or html, if you
want to think of it that way, a type of html anyway) to write up the
math expression, but then the browser has to know what to do with
this, or you need software that does.
The upside, however, is that now you are specifying math in a
text-based manner, and software with access to this text string can
extract all the information for math, be it to display it as an image,
turn it into speech, braille, highlighted synchronized speech, or
something altogether different.
MathML may not be perfect, it has gone through 3 revissions and I
think its technical drawbacks are few and far between, and would be at
such a high level that very few people would be likely to be
handcuffed by it.
Furthermore, there are two important things to knote about MathML:
1. It is a key component of HTML5, meaning that browsers who support
HTML5 when the implementation is complete (in around 2014) will
display math correctly fro a MathML code and
b. MathML is a key technolology for displaying math in the EPUB3
standard for eBooks.

So we have two mainstream technologies relying on an xml-baesd code
for displaying math. This should, hopefully, lead to a mass adoption
of MathML across the education, web,  and eBook publishing industries.
Then the problem becomes that of preference and technology. If we do
not like MathPlayer we can help improve it, or we can write our own
software, or ask NV Access or Freedom scientnfic to do it, software
that renders the math in the output we want, be it LaTeX, Nemeth or
something completely different.
The issue has been to have any way of accessible math accessibly, and
that battle may be won soon, at least it is going well.
After that it is up to blind users and Assistive Technology experts to
find out how they can best work with math and find out if MathML can
be mapped to that desired format.
Sure, sometimes sighted people´s help ismisguided and they have
incorrect understanding of the nature of the problems we face, don't
we all (I am not implying it is the case in this particular discussion
thread), but then it is up to us to either set them right or develop
solutions ourselves.
-Birkir

On 4/3/11, Sarah Jevnikar <sarah.jevnikar at utoronto.ca> wrote:
> This should go without saying but I'll say it anyway
> Be respectful to those legitimately trying to help.
> That is all.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindmath-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindmath-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> Behalf Of PR Stanley
> Sent: April 3, 2011 4:42 PM
> To: Blind Math list for those interested in mathematics
> Subject: Re: [Blindmath] mathplayer, jaws, and math in graphics?
>
> The good doctor here has obviously imbibed the myth of the one-eyed
> man in the country of the blind. For the second time
> he's  patronising us with his bilge about LaTeX being too complicated
> to learn and that we like good blind people ought to listen to our
> betters and buy the MathML con wholesale.
>
> "...I have a few documents I can post samples from which will > soon
> disabuse you of that notion."
>
> Once again, he's trying to frighten people off LaTeX in his usual
> condescending and thuggish manner. Just who the devil does he think
> he is to tell us what is complicated or not?
> "For each example that you can decode, I can provide another even
> more complicated example (and one that I've actually used in an article)."
>
> If he is so concerned about accessibility and he believes that
> complicated LaTeX isn't easily decipherable by us blind folks, then
> why would he deliberately go out of his way to use obfuscated code in
> his articles? In any case, what makes him think that a blind person
> couldn't learn to hack complicated LaTeX?
>
> "If I came across a web site that presented its mathematics as raw
> LaTeX code then I would not use that web site.  I would consider it
> second rate, and not a serious mathematical web site.  If I think
> like that, why should you think otherwise?"
>
> Because most of us are interested in information and the "raw latex"
> on wikipedia and wikibook serve that purpose perfectly well.  I would
> much rather read raw latex (which is very expressive and terse at the
> same time) than fiddle about with some buggy software that is
> designed on the premise that blind folks are too stupid to use a
> mainstream typesetting tool used by literally millions around the
> world, including academics and publishers from all nationalities.
>
> "... you should protest loudly and explain that raw LaTeX is not an
> accessible way to present mathematics."
>
> Well, I would like to protest loudly at the way he throws his weight
> about on this list for some dubious agenda which has nothing
> whatsoever to do with helping blind people.
>
> Paul
> `
> At 20:39 03/04/2011, you wrote:
>>On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 11:34:39AM -0700, Roopakshi Pathania wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Prof. Stacey,
>>
>>Thanks for the promotion.  Actually, I'm only a Dr.
>>
>>I'm not quite sure how to take your email.  Still, I'll have a go.
>>
>> > 1. The first expression you wrote is actually ASCII text, and not
> LaTeX...
>>
>>My apologies.  I should have written:
>>
>>\documentclass{article}\begin{document}\(x^2 + y^2 = z^2\)\end{document}
>>
>>which would have been much clearer.
>>
>> > 2. Do you want me to decode your second expression? Of course it
>> is quite a simple example as you yourself stated.
>>
>>For each example that you can decode, I can provide another even more
>>complicated example (and one that I've actually used in an article).  But
> the
>>point is not that there'll always be someone who can decode it, but that
> the
>>more complicated it gets then the fewer people will be able to do so.
>>A mathematical expression is hard enough to understand that putting extra
>>barriers in place is not a good idea.
>>
>> > 3. You are right that a serious LaTeX paper or article can be
>> hard to study. But then I skip initial code for the very same reason.
>> > Still, macros are present even in the main part of the article, so...
> yes.
>>
>>I've heard that Donald Knuth says that on first reading, people mentally
>>replace all mathematical expressions with "blah" and only go back and fill
> in
>>the blanks afterwards.
>>
>>I'll admit that I'm blurring the line slightly between a small extract in
>>a larger webpage and a whole document.
>>
>> > 4. This is also why OCR application InftyReader has a special
>> format in which only math is represented in LaTeX.
>> > And yes, most of the websites have LaTeX in alt tags alone, so
>> this makes life much simpler.
>> >
>> > When it comes to accessible math available on the web and in
>> ebooks, there  aren't many choices.
>> > So the lines blur between the real uses of LaTeX and MathML for a
>> screen reader user.
>>
>>Maybe I can make my point a little differently.  I am a sighted
> mathematician.
>>If I came across a website that presented its mathematics as raw LaTeX code
>>then I would not use that website.  I would consider it second rate, and
> not
>>a serious mathematical website.  If I think like that, why should you think
>>otherwise?
>>
>>Now I realise that there is a distinction between pragmatism and idealism,
> and
>>that pragmatically it may be a good idea to learn a few basic LaTeX
> symbols.
>>But at the same time, you should protest loudly and explain that raw LaTeX
> is
>>not an accessible way to present mathematics.
>>
>>Andrew
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Blindmath mailing list
>>Blindmath at nfbnet.org
>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindmath_nfbnet.org
>>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>for Blindmath:
>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindmath_nfbnet.org/prstanley%40ntlw
> orld.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blindmath mailing list
> Blindmath at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindmath_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Blindmath:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindmath_nfbnet.org/sarah.jevnikar%40
> utoronto.ca
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blindmath mailing list
> Blindmath at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindmath_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Blindmath:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindmath_nfbnet.org/birkir.gunnarsson%40gmail.com
>