From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by befuddled.reisers.ca (Postfix, from userid 65534) id F07B91EF839; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 09:03:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail0131.smtp25.com (mail0131.smtp25.com [75.126.84.131]) by befuddled.reisers.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 278CD1EF837 for ; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 09:03:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ccs.covici.com (d-out-001.smtp25.com [67.228.158.174] (may be forged)) by d-out-001.smtp25.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s99D3alv006975 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 09:03:37 -0400 Received: from ccs.covici.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ccs.covici.com (8.14.9/8.14.8) with ESMTP id s99D3ak3031405 for ; Thu, 9 Oct 2014 09:03:36 -0400 To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." Subject: Re: Speakup Requirements In-reply-to: <20141009124557.GH1044@opera.rednote.net> References: <20141009124557.GH1044@opera.rednote.net> Comments: In-reply-to Janina Sajka message dated "Thu, 09 Oct 2014 08:45:57 -0400." X-Mailer: MH-E 8.2; nmh 1.3; GNU Emacs 23.4.1 Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 09:03:36 -0400 Message-ID: <31404.1412859816@ccs.covici.com> From: covici@ccs.covici.com X-SpamH-OriginatingIP: 70.109.53.110 X-SpamH-Filter: d-out-001.smtp25.com-s99D3alv006975 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 X-BeenThere: speakup@linux-speakup.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 13:03:40 -0000 For me, two things stand out -- some way to read a large buffer and have the cursor stop where the speech stops talking and a find command to find text on the screen. The first speakup already has, the second should not be too difficult. Janina Sajka wrote: > The conversation about the future of Speakup is important as witnessed > by the flurry of mail here this past few hours. However, we've also > strayed into the usual range of related issues. I'd like to put in a > place holder for a fundamental question: > > What are our console screen reader requirements? > > We should, imo, have community consensus on our requirements, probably > backed by use cases, than we can clearly communicate. > > Had we had such back in the mid 2000's, pulse might have been designed > better. I say this about pulse, because I don't believe it meets one key > requirement we have, low-latency response, char by typed char, word by > word, etc. > > To my mind we'd be better served by jack where latency and high priority > execution are core values. > > So, what are our requirements? > > 1.) Latency. Very low, and highly responsive feedback in the > consumption of keyborad input, whether into the system or as screen > review. > > 2.) Access to on screen messages as early and late as possible, as > close to boot, and as late in shutdown as possible. > > Then, if we have to move to console. What we we like that we have not > had since Kirk first published his kernel patch back 20 years ago? > Here's my top ask: > > A. Context aware profiles. DOS had this in spades. You could know > what application had focus and adjust the screen reader behavior > accordingly. ASAP and Vocal-Eyes were brilliant at responding to > WordPerfect, Commo, etc., etc. If we're going to console space, let's > make sure we can be app focus aware. > > What else? > > Janina > > John G. Heim writes: > > I've never seen a server without a serial port. > > > > > > > > On 10/08/14 14:43, Kyle wrote: > > >It does appear to me that something like this will force more of Speakup > > >into userspace. However, unlike others, I'm not entirely opposed to the > > >idea of Speakup leaving the kernel, and I think it can only be a good > > >thing, especially on newer machines, where dedicated serial ports are > > >all but obsolete, and software in userspace can take better advantage of > > >things like Pulseaudio and libusb, meaning more extensive software and > > >hardware speech support. For example, there would no longer be a need > > >for kernel modules to control speech synthesizers, and there would no > > >longer be a need to have external userspace connectors such as Espeakup, > > >as the entire Speakup screen reader could be moved into userspace, and > > >anything that interfaces with a speech synthesizer could be either > > >internal or could be a library that interfaces with a speech API like > > >speech-dispatcher or others. Even better, if Speakup is moved entirely > > >into userspace, it could give rise to far better access to consoles on > > >*BSD and other Unix operating systems, as the code could be far more > > >portable between operating systems when it doesn't have to be tied into > > >a specific kernel. Just my $0.02 BSD. That's Bahamian dollars lol. > > >~Kyle > > >http://kyle.tk/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Speakup mailing list > > Speakup@linux-speakup.org > > http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > -- > > Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200 > sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net > Email: janina@rednote.net > > Linux Foundation Fellow > Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup: http://a11y.org > > The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) > Chair, Protocols & Formats http://www.w3.org/wai/pf > Indie UI http://www.w3.org/WAI/IndieUI/ > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup@linux-speakup.org > http://linux-speakup.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/speakup -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici covici@ccs.covici.com