From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from vms048pub.verizon.net ([206.46.252.48]) by speech.braille.uwo.ca with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1HoPQf-0002P1-00 for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 15:44:58 -0400 Received: from ALBERTLC7SN0ZA ([68.163.161.145]) by vms048.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0JI500EPFG6R8651@vms048.mailsrvcs.net> for speakup@braille.uwo.ca; Wed, 16 May 2007 14:44:53 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 15:46:26 -0400 From: "Albert E. Sten-Clanton" Subject: Re: heretical thoughts was Re: Speakup dropped from Ubuntu To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." Message-id: <005101c797f2$e4787d90$6405a8c0@ALBERTLC7SN0ZA> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1896 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <464B2C08.4010500@ubuntu.com> X-BeenThere: speakup@braille.uwo.ca X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." List-Id: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 19:44:58 -0000 > > The problem with having only software synthesis on the system is = that > > when there is a problem, the software synthesis is often the first > > thing to stop functioning. > Again, that's a bug and a community like this one would do well to = help > find and resolve those. That would help a much larger, less technical > group in the long term. Do I misunderstand, or do you mean that it should be technically = feasible to have software speech kick in as early in the boot process as = speakup can with a hardware speech device, as well as at other times when it now may = become unusable? My very limited understanding of the technology tells = me that's unlikely, but I'd be glad to be wrong. If that can't happen, though, then Gene's = key complaint, as I read it, stands: software speech is second-rate = access, if that's all there is. > > I make my living as a computer consultant. It will be to bad if I'm > > forced to recomend that folks stay clear of Ubuntu because of it's = lack > > of support for text console accessibility, but if that's the choice = I'm > > force to, then that's what I'll do. I hope the folks managing = Ubuntu > > will reconsider their decission, but if not, all I can do is steer = clear > > of distros that insist on causing me grieff. > > This is what I mean by 'not engaging constructively with the wider > community'. > Actually, I think Gene is indeed constructive here. He pointed out that = if your product doesn't meet the needs he sees he'll use another. = That's rightly part of the freedom we claim. At the very least, it's no less = constructive a comment or choice than the decision to remove speakup is. My own purpose here is not to bash ubuntu. As I see it, the worst = problem is the failure to include speakup in the vanilla kernel. Then, = the developers of neither ubuntu nor any other distro would have to worry about = "unpredictable" results of including something "non-standard." I know = there was correspondence on this list in which it was said that the speakup code didn't meet the = relevant standards. (Indeed, there were specific suggestions on = revising it.) I also know that the grml kernel document I read says that grml uses a = vanilla kernel with some patches, and I know speakup is included in = those patches. (I use it right now largely for that reason.) It seems to me that if = the grml folks can include it, then we should probably regard as suspect = any "standard" that keeps it out of the vanilla kernel. I'm willing to be corrected, = but even realizing how little I know, I doubt that my inference is = unreasonable. Al