speakup desktop again

speakup desktop again

[Christopher Moore]

Hello,
I saw this topic on the speakup list recently and followed the 
discussion with interest.  

I'd classify myself as a happy linux user.  When I was working I more or 
less had to use windows to conform to the culture of my employer.  Even 
if linux alternatives were available, convincing the IT staff that 
accessing their network with "non-standard" software would somehow 
compromise their security would not have been 
an easy task.  Now that I am retired, I find that the linux text console 
satisfies most of my computer needs except for web browsing.  So I still 
need to boot up the ms windows to access some web pages when I need to 
order something online or listen to audio streams.  

While reading this discussion, it occurred to me that we already have a 
text-based desktop environment in the form of emacs.  What emacs lacks 
is an up-to-date web browser.  While I've read comments on the w3 
browser, most of them are not favorable.  What emacs does have, however, 
is buffers and robust editing features.  If, there were a way to say, 
run firefox in a X session and control it from an emacs environment, 
would this not fill the gap?  

Let me take this a step further.  We're all aware of the effort to make 
the gnome desktop accessible.  This is a major undertaking and involves 
retooling many applications to use the gtk+ archa tecture to expose 
their contents.  It further involves developing screen readers to 
retrieve this information and speak it in some usable format.  To-date I 
am aware of three such screen readers: gnopernicus, orca and lsr.  Work 
on the first appears to have stopped while work on the latter two is 
still underway.  

This brings me back to the emacs environment.  Much of the work on the 
above screen readers centers on developing speech and braille output 
facilities.  Orca for example, has an on-screen dialog for 
modifying speech, braille an magnification parameters.  If the screen 
readers were designed to communicate with emacs, the spoken content 
would appear in an emacs buffer and the applications could be controlled 
from a text console.  If this approach had been taken, all the effort 
put into developing the braille and speech facilities would have been 
unnecessary.

I'm looking for volunteers to investigate the prospect of 
communicating 
with X applications from a console environment.  While it would be nice 
to use the entire gnome desktop, my initial focus would probably on web 
browsing since there is a definite gap in this area.  

Feel free to comment on the speakup list or to me directly.  If such a 
group were to be be formed it would probably make sense to start a 
separate mailing list or other vehicle for sharing ideas.

Chris

Re: speakup desktop again

[Zachary Kline]

Howdy,
    Emacspeak--http://emacspeak.sf.net--is already a way to speech interface 
with Emacs.  It does work with Emacs W3, which does lack some features, I 
admit.  But, nevertheless, it does exist and does work.
Another option that I heard recently mentioned on another list was FireVox. 
(I can't remember the URL off hand, but do a Google search for FireVox, and 
you'll find it.  A bit of trouble to set up, but it's dueable, and does 
handle a lot of web browsing needs.)
I personally like Emacspeak--at least so far--but am open to new ideas as 
well.  The way I see it, subverting the way existing applications work--or 
for instance controling X from the console--isn't really the way to go. 
Orca and the like should be encouraged to keep going, because the way I see 
things it's only a matter of time before those efforts succeed.
Respectfully yours, and hope this helps some,
Zack.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Christopher Moore" <christopher.h.moore@verizon.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 8:36 AM
Subject: speakup desktop again


> Hello,
> I saw this topic on the speakup list recently and followed the
> discussion with interest.
>
> I'd classify myself as a happy linux user.  When I was working I more or
> less had to use windows to conform to the culture of my employer.  Even
> if linux alternatives were available, convincing the IT staff that
> accessing their network with "non-standard" software would somehow
> compromise their security would not have been
> an easy task.  Now that I am retired, I find that the linux text console
> satisfies most of my computer needs except for web browsing.  So I still
> need to boot up the ms windows to access some web pages when I need to
> order something online or listen to audio streams.
>
> While reading this discussion, it occurred to me that we already have a
> text-based desktop environment in the form of emacs.  What emacs lacks
> is an up-to-date web browser.  While I've read comments on the w3
> browser, most of them are not favorable.  What emacs does have, however,
> is buffers and robust editing features.  If, there were a way to say,
> run firefox in a X session and control it from an emacs environment,
> would this not fill the gap?
>
> Let me take this a step further.  We're all aware of the effort to make
> the gnome desktop accessible.  This is a major undertaking and involves
> retooling many applications to use the gtk+ archa tecture to expose
> their contents.  It further involves developing screen readers to
> retrieve this information and speak it in some usable format.  To-date I
> am aware of three such screen readers: gnopernicus, orca and lsr.  Work
> on the first appears to have stopped while work on the latter two is
> still underway.
>
> This brings me back to the emacs environment.  Much of the work on the
> above screen readers centers on developing speech and braille output
> facilities.  Orca for example, has an on-screen dialog for
> modifying speech, braille an magnification parameters.  If the screen
> readers were designed to communicate with emacs, the spoken content
> would appear in an emacs buffer and the applications could be controlled
> from a text console.  If this approach had been taken, all the effort
> put into developing the braille and speech facilities would have been
> unnecessary.
>
> I'm looking for volunteers to investigate the prospect of
> communicating
> with X applications from a console environment.  While it would be nice
> to use the entire gnome desktop, my initial focus would probably on web
> browsing since there is a definite gap in this area.
>
> Feel free to comment on the speakup list or to me directly.  If such a
> group were to be be formed it would probably make sense to start a
> separate mailing list or other vehicle for sharing ideas.
>
> Chris
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: speakup desktop again

[Nick Gawronski]

Hi, I am using a dectalk express with speakup on debian etch.  Would there 
be any advantage to installing emacs speak for use with emacs or does 
speakup work as well as emacs speak?  How do I disable speakup when I want 
to start emacs speak?  Also, How in grub do you tell it to boot another 
kernel in the list rather then the default one?  In lilo I would just type 
in the label but how do I do this in grub?
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Zachary Kline" <Z_kline@hotmail.com>
To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 11:07 AM
Subject: Re: speakup desktop again


> Howdy,
>    Emacspeak--http://emacspeak.sf.net--is already a way to speech 
> interface
> with Emacs.  It does work with Emacs W3, which does lack some features, I
> admit.  But, nevertheless, it does exist and does work.
> Another option that I heard recently mentioned on another list was 
> FireVox.
> (I can't remember the URL off hand, but do a Google search for FireVox, 
> and
> you'll find it.  A bit of trouble to set up, but it's dueable, and does
> handle a lot of web browsing needs.)
> I personally like Emacspeak--at least so far--but am open to new ideas as
> well.  The way I see it, subverting the way existing applications work--or
> for instance controling X from the console--isn't really the way to go.
> Orca and the like should be encouraged to keep going, because the way I 
> see
> things it's only a matter of time before those efforts succeed.
> Respectfully yours, and hope this helps some,
> Zack.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Christopher Moore" <christopher.h.moore@verizon.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 8:36 AM
> Subject: speakup desktop again
>
>
>> Hello,
>> I saw this topic on the speakup list recently and followed the
>> discussion with interest.
>>
>> I'd classify myself as a happy linux user.  When I was working I more or
>> less had to use windows to conform to the culture of my employer.  Even
>> if linux alternatives were available, convincing the IT staff that
>> accessing their network with "non-standard" software would somehow
>> compromise their security would not have been
>> an easy task.  Now that I am retired, I find that the linux text console
>> satisfies most of my computer needs except for web browsing.  So I still
>> need to boot up the ms windows to access some web pages when I need to
>> order something online or listen to audio streams.
>>
>> While reading this discussion, it occurred to me that we already have a
>> text-based desktop environment in the form of emacs.  What emacs lacks
>> is an up-to-date web browser.  While I've read comments on the w3
>> browser, most of them are not favorable.  What emacs does have, however,
>> is buffers and robust editing features.  If, there were a way to say,
>> run firefox in a X session and control it from an emacs environment,
>> would this not fill the gap?
>>
>> Let me take this a step further.  We're all aware of the effort to make
>> the gnome desktop accessible.  This is a major undertaking and involves
>> retooling many applications to use the gtk+ archa tecture to expose
>> their contents.  It further involves developing screen readers to
>> retrieve this information and speak it in some usable format.  To-date I
>> am aware of three such screen readers: gnopernicus, orca and lsr.  Work
>> on the first appears to have stopped while work on the latter two is
>> still underway.
>>
>> This brings me back to the emacs environment.  Much of the work on the
>> above screen readers centers on developing speech and braille output
>> facilities.  Orca for example, has an on-screen dialog for
>> modifying speech, braille an magnification parameters.  If the screen
>> readers were designed to communicate with emacs, the spoken content
>> would appear in an emacs buffer and the applications could be controlled
>> from a text console.  If this approach had been taken, all the effort
>> put into developing the braille and speech facilities would have been
>> unnecessary.
>>
>> I'm looking for volunteers to investigate the prospect of
>> communicating
>> with X applications from a console environment.  While it would be nice
>> to use the entire gnome desktop, my initial focus would probably on web
>> browsing since there is a definite gap in this area.
>>
>> Feel free to comment on the speakup list or to me directly.  If such a
>> group were to be be formed it would probably make sense to start a
>> separate mailing list or other vehicle for sharing ideas.
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Speakup mailing list
>> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: speakup desktop again

[Gregory Nowak]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Granted, however keep in mind that emacs does also have a steep
learning curve, so it may not be a choice for everyone. Some people
find it easier to navigate to, and hit enter on a spellcheck button in a GUI menu,
rather then typing m-x ispell-buffer, enter, or memorizing a shortcut
keystroke for it for example. Yes, some find this kind of navigation
and use to be annoying, time consuming, and wasteful, but again, there
are those that prefer that method for their own reasons.

Greg



On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 11:36:46AM -0400, Christopher Moore wrote:
> Hello,
> I saw this topic on the speakup list recently and followed the 
> discussion with interest.  
> 
> I'd classify myself as a happy linux user.  When I was working I more or 
> less had to use windows to conform to the culture of my employer.  Even 
> if linux alternatives were available, convincing the IT staff that 
> accessing their network with "non-standard" software would somehow 
> compromise their security would not have been 
> an easy task.  Now that I am retired, I find that the linux text console 
> satisfies most of my computer needs except for web browsing.  So I still 
> need to boot up the ms windows to access some web pages when I need to 
> order something online or listen to audio streams.  
> 
> While reading this discussion, it occurred to me that we already have a 
> text-based desktop environment in the form of emacs.  What emacs lacks 
> is an up-to-date web browser.  While I've read comments on the w3 
> browser, most of them are not favorable.  What emacs does have, however, 
> is buffers and robust editing features.  If, there were a way to say, 
> run firefox in a X session and control it from an emacs environment, 
> would this not fill the gap?  
> 
> Let me take this a step further.  We're all aware of the effort to make 
> the gnome desktop accessible.  This is a major undertaking and involves 
> retooling many applications to use the gtk+ archa tecture to expose 
> their contents.  It further involves developing screen readers to 
> retrieve this information and speak it in some usable format.  To-date I 
> am aware of three such screen readers: gnopernicus, orca and lsr.  Work 
> on the first appears to have stopped while work on the latter two is 
> still underway.  
> 
> This brings me back to the emacs environment.  Much of the work on the 
> above screen readers centers on developing speech and braille output 
> facilities.  Orca for example, has an on-screen dialog for 
> modifying speech, braille an magnification parameters.  If the screen 
> readers were designed to communicate with emacs, the spoken content 
> would appear in an emacs buffer and the applications could be controlled 
> from a text console.  If this approach had been taken, all the effort 
> put into developing the braille and speech facilities would have been 
> unnecessary.
> 
> I'm looking for volunteers to investigate the prospect of 
> communicating 
> with X applications from a console environment.  While it would be nice 
> to use the entire gnome desktop, my initial focus would probably on web 
> browsing since there is a definite gap in this area.  
> 
> Feel free to comment on the speakup list or to me directly.  If such a 
> group were to be be formed it would probably make sense to start a 
> separate mailing list or other vehicle for sharing ideas.
> 
> Chris
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

- -- 
web site: http://www.romuald.net.eu.org
gpg public key: http://www.romuald.net.eu.org/pubkey.asc
skype: gregn1
(authorization required, add me to your contacts list first)

- --
Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGB/rb7s9z/XlyUyARAsGNAJ40zMQn0bUo2uEGZlnnCE1R7ntydQCgnoI5
XP+/QFGH316SOW4+aMk4ZoI=
=cubZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: speakup desktop again

[Michael Whapples]

While your idea is an interesting one, I feel that interfacing between X and 
something such as emacs is not the way to go. As previously pointed out, 
emacspeak has a steep learning curve, and some prefer a GUI (I think each 
type of environment has its place, I use a mixture of GUI and command line 
apps, and choose the most appropriate to what I am trying to achieve).

I feel the problems in developing the gnome screen readers such as orca and 
lsr are not the braille and speech output, but rather in their interfacing 
to the GUI. As an example, orca uses brltty for the braille output which 
handles all the braille display stuff, and orca only needs to concern itself 
with how that should be presented to brltty for display and gather the 
braille keypresses. Both of those parts would be needed to be done when 
interfacing with emacspeak buffers, so I don't get what the gain is. Another 
thing I like about having the GUI available, is most sighted users (computer 
users in general, although I feel it is increasing on Linux) are used to a 
GUI, so if I get stuck or working with someone with a computer running 
linux, then they are more likely to understand what is there (or at least 
not get put off by the unconventional (compared to the norm) interface). I 
also question if there would be any (or how much) of a performance gain 
would be got in doing it this way, as certain parts, if not a full session, 
of the X system would need to be loaded for the apps to work.

If that seems a bit negative, its I feel that you would have alot of work to 
do such a project, and the results may not be better than what exists. The 
one thing I would say may be good to try is to interface with firefox 
directly, as web browsing is something you say is lacking, rather than 
trying to interface with the entire of gnome, which would duplicate some of 
what you have in emacs, and the work that is already being done. I believe 
in not needing to do more work than is needed, may be you differ on this.

From
Michael Whapples
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Christopher Moore" <christopher.h.moore@verizon.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 4:36 PM
Subject: speakup desktop again


> Hello,
> I saw this topic on the speakup list recently and followed the
> discussion with interest.
>
> I'd classify myself as a happy linux user.  When I was working I more or
> less had to use windows to conform to the culture of my employer.  Even
> if linux alternatives were available, convincing the IT staff that
> accessing their network with "non-standard" software would somehow
> compromise their security would not have been
> an easy task.  Now that I am retired, I find that the linux text console
> satisfies most of my computer needs except for web browsing.  So I still
> need to boot up the ms windows to access some web pages when I need to
> order something online or listen to audio streams.
>
> While reading this discussion, it occurred to me that we already have a
> text-based desktop environment in the form of emacs.  What emacs lacks
> is an up-to-date web browser.  While I've read comments on the w3
> browser, most of them are not favorable.  What emacs does have, however,
> is buffers and robust editing features.  If, there were a way to say,
> run firefox in a X session and control it from an emacs environment,
> would this not fill the gap?
>
> Let me take this a step further.  We're all aware of the effort to make
> the gnome desktop accessible.  This is a major undertaking and involves
> retooling many applications to use the gtk+ archa tecture to expose
> their contents.  It further involves developing screen readers to
> retrieve this information and speak it in some usable format.  To-date I
> am aware of three such screen readers: gnopernicus, orca and lsr.  Work
> on the first appears to have stopped while work on the latter two is
> still underway.
>
> This brings me back to the emacs environment.  Much of the work on the
> above screen readers centers on developing speech and braille output
> facilities.  Orca for example, has an on-screen dialog for
> modifying speech, braille an magnification parameters.  If the screen
> readers were designed to communicate with emacs, the spoken content
> would appear in an emacs buffer and the applications could be controlled
> from a text console.  If this approach had been taken, all the effort
> put into developing the braille and speech facilities would have been
> unnecessary.
>
> I'm looking for volunteers to investigate the prospect of
> communicating
> with X applications from a console environment.  While it would be nice
> to use the entire gnome desktop, my initial focus would probably on web
> browsing since there is a definite gap in this area.
>
> Feel free to comment on the speakup list or to me directly.  If such a
> group were to be be formed it would probably make sense to start a
> separate mailing list or other vehicle for sharing ideas.
>
> Chris
>
>
>