Speakup Configurator

Speakup Configurator

[Steve Holmes]

I think what I'm gonna do is try and accomodate Speakout and Doubletalk
first. This will enable me to get the program to save valid parameter
features and ranges for each synthesiser so that the proper features and
ranges can be made available automatically depending on which synthesiser
is currently being used. Once this is accomplished, I should be able to
add other synthesisers in the future with much less fuss. Right now, I
hard coded things thinking of one box and well I got painted into a corner
real fast! Gee, thought my programming skills could have helped me avoid
that trap:).

One general question I would like to ask of all synthesiser users though,
What about parameters that allow for a hundred or more choices? I'm
thinking of a range of 00 to 99 or something like that. With my current
design, one could end up having to press up or down arrow a hundred times
to make the complete loop. Would it be necessary to stop at every point or
would it be acceptable to say, skip every ten values to scale our keyboard
approach to having ten choices instead of a hundred.

Whad do you all think?

Re: Speakup Configurator

[Thomas Ward]

As far as the Dectalk Express goes I remember that Jaws for Dos used a pitch
skale of 1 to 10. This basically, moved the pitch by 10 everytime you moved
up or down.
I think this would work great with Speakup, and I can't wait to see the
updated version of your program.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Holmes" <steve@holmesgrown.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 11:43 AM
Subject: Speakup Configurator


> I think what I'm gonna do is try and accomodate Speakout and Doubletalk
> first. This will enable me to get the program to save valid parameter
> features and ranges for each synthesiser so that the proper features and
> ranges can be made available automatically depending on which synthesiser
> is currently being used. Once this is accomplished, I should be able to
> add other synthesisers in the future with much less fuss. Right now, I
> hard coded things thinking of one box and well I got painted into a corner
> real fast! Gee, thought my programming skills could have helped me avoid
> that trap:).
>
> One general question I would like to ask of all synthesiser users though,
> What about parameters that allow for a hundred or more choices? I'm
> thinking of a range of 00 to 99 or something like that. With my current
> design, one could end up having to press up or down arrow a hundred times
> to make the complete loop. Would it be necessary to stop at every point or
> would it be acceptable to say, skip every ten values to scale our keyboard
> approach to having ten choices instead of a hundred.
>
> Whad do you all think?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Speakup Configurator

[Michael]

Steve:

I think trimming down the pitch ranges to 1-10 would be a good idea.
I for one wouldn't want to tap an up or down arrow key 100 times to get the
right pitch configuration.  On the other hand I'm just happy to be able to
access Linux in the first place,
with no control of my pitch.  I really am in no position to present an
opinion yet! <grin>
Its nice to see new developments proposed and tested.
Now if you could develop a screen reader for the X gue as solid as Jaws, now
that would be something. HAHAHAHAH!
Keep up the good work.

    Michael




----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Holmes <steve@holmesgrown.com>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 1:13 PM
Subject: Speakup Configurator


> I think what I'm gonna do is try and accomodate Speakout and Doubletalk
> first. This will enable me to get the program to save valid parameter
> features and ranges for each synthesiser so that the proper features and
> ranges can be made available automatically depending on which synthesiser
> is currently being used. Once this is accomplished, I should be able to
> add other synthesisers in the future with much less fuss. Right now, I
> hard coded things thinking of one box and well I got painted into a corner
> real fast! Gee, thought my programming skills could have helped me avoid
> that trap:).
>
> One general question I would like to ask of all synthesiser users though,
> What about parameters that allow for a hundred or more choices? I'm
> thinking of a range of 00 to 99 or something like that. With my current
> design, one could end up having to press up or down arrow a hundred times
> to make the complete loop. Would it be necessary to stop at every point or
> would it be acceptable to say, skip every ten values to scale our keyboard
> approach to having ten choices instead of a hundred.
>
> Whad do you all think?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Speakup Configurator

[Thomas Stivers]

You could use the pageup and pagedown keys to increment and decrement
values by larger amounts. I am not sure which key would be preferred.

On Mon, 8 Oct 2001, Steve Holmes wrote:

> I think what I'm gonna do is try and accomodate Speakout and Doubletalk
> first. This will enable me to get the program to save valid parameter
> features and ranges for each synthesiser so that the proper features and
> ranges can be made available automatically depending on which synthesiser
> is currently being used. Once this is accomplished, I should be able to
> add other synthesisers in the future with much less fuss. Right now, I
> hard coded things thinking of one box and well I got painted into a corner
> real fast! Gee, thought my programming skills could have helped me avoid
> that trap:).
>
> One general question I would like to ask of all synthesiser users though,
> What about parameters that allow for a hundred or more choices? I'm
> thinking of a range of 00 to 99 or something like that. With my current
> design, one could end up having to press up or down arrow a hundred times
> to make the complete loop. Would it be necessary to stop at every point or
> would it be acceptable to say, skip every ten values to scale our keyboard
> approach to having ten choices instead of a hundred.
>
> Whad do you all think?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Speakup Configurator

[Jason]

Actually between the contant quest to improove AccessX and Sun Microsystems 
jumping on the GTK/Gnome project, that's being done, albeit slowly.


> Steve:
>
> I think trimming down the pitch ranges to 1-10 would be a good idea.
> I for one wouldn't want to tap an up or down arrow key 100 times to get the
> right pitch configuration.  On the other hand I'm just happy to be able to
> access Linux in the first place,
> with no control of my pitch.  I really am in no position to present an
> opinion yet! <grin>
> Its nice to see new developments proposed and tested.
> Now if you could develop a screen reader for the X gue as solid as Jaws,
> now that would be something. HAHAHAHAH!
> Keep up the good work.
>
>     Michael
>

RE: Speakup Configurator

[Watson, Keith]

Why not just set it up that ctrl-arrow increments by 10's and arrow
increments by 1's? That would solve the large number problem.

Keith

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Holmes [mailto:steve@holmesgrown.com]
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 11:43 AM
To: speakup@braille.uwo.ca
Subject: Speakup Configurator


I think what I'm gonna do is try and accomodate Speakout and Doubletalk
first. This will enable me to get the program to save valid parameter
features and ranges for each synthesiser so that the proper features and
ranges can be made available automatically depending on which synthesiser
is currently being used. Once this is accomplished, I should be able to
add other synthesisers in the future with much less fuss. Right now, I
hard coded things thinking of one box and well I got painted into a corner
real fast! Gee, thought my programming skills could have helped me avoid
that trap:).

One general question I would like to ask of all synthesiser users though,
What about parameters that allow for a hundred or more choices? I'm
thinking of a range of 00 to 99 or something like that. With my current
design, one could end up having to press up or down arrow a hundred times
to make the complete loop. Would it be necessary to stop at every point or
would it be acceptable to say, skip every ten values to scale our keyboard
approach to having ten choices instead of a hundred.

Whad do you all think?


_______________________________________________
Speakup mailing list
Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: Speakup Configurator

[Buddy Brannan]

Hi Steve,

You can get the name of the current synth from
/proc/speakup/synth

Now as far as the different parameters of all the synths, I'm sure
someone has that somewhere--I wish I did. ... 
-- 
Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV    | From the pines down to the projects,
Email: davros@ycardz.com | Life pushes up through the cracks.
Phone: (972) 276-6360    | And it's only going forward,
ICQ: 36621210            | And it's never going back.--Small Potatoes

Speakup Configurator

[Steve Holmes]

After sending sp-config to the list yesterday, I learned from a couple
DoubleTalk users that the tone and pitch parameters are apparently
different from how they work with the Speakout, my box of choice.

The program simply sends the parms to /proc/speakup/<whatever> like rate
goes to /proc/speakup/rate. I gues what I need next are two things:
- The various allowed parms for each synthesiser supported by Speakup.
- A good solid method of detecting what synth is currently being used.

I guess the second could be resolved in the short term by capturing the
name on the command line using the speakup-defined synthesiser names.
Since I don't own any of the other synth's, I'll have to colect this info
from you all; gee, this might repeat what other speakup developers have
done already:).

Once I have the synthesiser identified, I could go and add the additional
parms supported by that box as long as /proc/speakup files are available.

Thanks for the help.