Re: Horizontal Scrolling

Hi Wayne,

I wonder if the problem you describe, particularly the fixation region, could be ameliorated by the technology of Beeline Reader. See http://www.beelinereader.com. I apologize in advance if not. It just means I am not yet understanding the problem you described, which I find quite intriguing.

John

John Rochford
Director, INDEX Program
Instructor, Family Medicine and Community Health
Eunice Kennedy Shriver Center
University of Massachusetts Medical School
www.DisabilityInfo.org<http://<br/>www.DisabilityInfo.org>



On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 1:43 PM -0800, "Wayne Dick" <wayneedick@gmail.com<mailto:wayneedick@gmail.com>> wrote:


Comments Harvey-Walker Article: Reading with peripheral vision: A comparison of reading dynamic scrolling and static text with a simulated central <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004269891400056X>

The Harvey and Walker article does not support screen magnification without word wrapping as a mode of accommodation, but it is very interesting. The paper certainly does describe how I read. I am an eccentric (slant) viewer owing to my central retina scarring. Their dynamic scrolling that keeps a controlled fixation point actually describes my adaptation to reading.  I either use a hand held lens and / or a telescope and move across the page physically keeping the fixation location in a small range, or I use very large print on a screen and move my head across the screen also keeping the fixation point in confined space. Very interesting.

This could be a model for new AT. It would involve totally linear output like a screen reader. Piping text through the accessibility API could work. WCAG 2.0  adjustment would be minor. Some screen magnifiers do supply this with masking all but the active line.


The problems would be self pacing reading and viewport capacity. The drifting text used by Harvey-Walker is fine for material that is well below one's intellectual capacity but what content like, "The limit of a function f(x) is a if and only if for every ε>0 there exists a δ>0 such that |f(x)−a|<ε whenever |x−a|<δ." This is an elementary but difficult concept. Self paced reading is necessary. There is also loss of context with the reduced amount of content to a single line. The entire definition of the limit of a function can fit in one page wrapped text on a 13 inch laptop at 48pt (3/4 inch) print. Note: that is 480% or 10 point. Even though reading speed and comprehension could suffer without proper training to keep the fixation region small as I do, the intellectual context can be maintained. For my work, mathematics and information technology, context is important.

Comparing the horizontal scrolling of Harvey and Walker to horizontal scrolling on a screen magnifier is not really accurate. Harvey and Walker reduce the traversal complexity of reading to get their results. The normal reading format requires that one must track and scan a two dimensional object, the page, but one must only scroll in one dimension (vertically with a screen, horizontally with a book). This is more complex than Harvey and Walker, but much less complex than zoomed text. The screen magnifier increases traversal complexity by adding bi-directional scrolling. In terms of operational complexity, reading using horizontally drifting text in a single line format is most simple. Normal page navigation comes next with two dimensional in page traversal and uni-directinal scrolling for page to page. Magnification is most complex with normal visual tracking and scanning within the page as well is horizontal scrolling withing the line. Then there is normal vertical scrolling to go page to page.