I was thinking of Windows users when I spoke (get it? ;)
Really though, for the average humanoid the fun sort of gui interface is
what people seek out as their "ease of use" type (pun? no...) of comfort
blanket. It wouldn't harm me in the least to have some buttons to click on
to do what the Insert Menu now does since I have been using such programs
for so long now. In fact to be realistic the validity of just such a gui
shouldn't be cast off as mere nonsense imho.
You speak (pun? yes...) of voice recognition, well pass me by please. From
what I've been able to do with it before I believe I'd be better off wholy
in DOS with only a PC speaker and no mic.
This isn't to say all this would be a bad thing to have all at once.
There's always switches to turn things on or off, just so none of it would
hinder a render (rhyme!). That sure sounded like a quote echoing down
through the ages.


Ken wrote:
> 
> Bob Hughes wrote:
> >
> > The GUI idea is an interesting one I think because I've often thought what
> > it might be like if POV-Ray had at least a graphical Insert Menu (of
> > Windows version anyway). You know, just click on a button and drop into
> > the text editor the particular choice. Plus customization of those said
> > buttons in a way similar to any popular paint program, where you could
> > have a set of parameters already such as scale and orientation/location.
> > Lets say you click on Cone and drag that to a spot in the file. Either
> > leave it as default (already preset by you earlier) or right-click the
> > Cone button and get a dialog for changing the possible values. And of
> > course this and others would all need to be in categories and
> > subcategories to fit into the GUI "toolbars" window.
> 
>   I think windows users and especially those that rely on the mouse
> overly much are just plain nuts. By the time you move the mouse up,
> focus on your selection, verify the parameters are what you need for
> the task, oops that's no good, bring up a field dialogue to change
> parameters, decide the changes are good, then execute the placement
> of the object from the list, you could have easily typed it in and
> probably had time left over to add 2 or 3 more objects as a bonus.
> I only reach for that darn mouse when it is an absolute necessity and
> will navigate via hot keys and arrow keys at every possible opportunity.
> 
>  What I am waiting for is a voice recognition editor for Pov. Speak into
> a small lapel mike - object and it places object { into the editor space
> for you. You then say foo bar, pigment, rgb .5, .6, .7, and then say
> right bracket right bracket and it will produce the following from your
> vocally directed commands:
> 
> object { Foo_Bar pigment { rgb < 0.5, 0.6, 0.7> }}
> 
>   If you insist on having some form of indented (shudder) script you
> could simply have that as an automatic part of the operation and not
> even have to worry about instructing the software to do so. That should
> definitely be left as a user choice of course.
>   You want to copy something on a different line you merely instruct
> the software - line 42, column 7 highlight c7, c19 copy - and the
> software will highlight everything between column 7 to 19 on line 42
> and  then place it into the buffer. You get the idea. Once you get a
> few basic commands placed into your personal recognition dictionary
> it would do away with menus, mice, and hot keys combinations on the
> keyboard as well as the reductions in carpal tunnel syndrome and
> ligament injuries as well as reduce the likelihood of arthritis in
> your golden years of life.
>   I can talk a bit faster than I can type and I can definitely enunciate
> clearly enough that typos would no longer be a slow down like they are now.
> Once you get past teaching the program your voice commands you could whip
> through a fairly complicated scene with little or no physical effort and
> it might even begin to make it so people are less reliant on modelling
> programs to write it out for them. Voice recognition software is also not
> bound by language barriers so it would make it easier for those using the
> software not native to the home country of the developers. They could
> give commands in their own language and the software would spit out whatever
> the scene parser needs to execute it properly.
> 
>   Any programmers out there that want to take on this simple yet decidedly
> rewarding little challenge ?
> 
>   I would gladly pay you with a debt of eternal gratitude and sing your
> praises to the heavens above and to the earth below, from the edges of the
> land to the vast open expanses of the seven seas and beyond that even.
> 
>  I say we need less reliance on windows G.U.I. and more on applied I.Q..
> 
> --
> Ken Tyler
> 
> mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

-- 
 omniVERSE: beyond the universe
  http://members.aol.com/inversez/homepage.htm
 mailto://inversez@aol.com?Subject=PoV-News

Post a reply to this message