software speech for speakup

software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

Hi All,

Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for speakup. I certinly don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so please read on if you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial ports on a PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some earlier posts I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this situation). As a result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the other OS on such a machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting tired of using the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux compatible). I know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software synth that would work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't write anything for IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product. However, as I stated earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to use software speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know that I could use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently downloaded it and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given a choice of access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus, not writing a driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me works without a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly doesn't have to be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would be nice to have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to modify a dectalk or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've taken c++ my junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science). Even so, I have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs work that come with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and hopefully learn more. As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup driver for viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind switching to the opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've wined enough. Kirk, I guess I'm simply asking you if you could possibly consider changing your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for speakup for now at least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me, please write so that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe try to persaude Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
Greg

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Reiser]

Hi Greg:  Thank you for your well reasoned thoughts.  I did not say I
wouldn't support or write a driver for Via Voice.  What I have said is
that it is not on my priority list.  Its proprietary nature is
certainly a good reason not to support it in my opinion though.  My
problem with Via Voice or festival for that matter is their size.
Once I have modules working and have implemented Tuxtalk and the
Dectalk pc drivers, I would be willing to consider a package such as
Via Voice.  I am not sure just how large of module can be loaded into
the kernel, maybe it doesn't matter at all, I simply don't know
currently.  Until I have some of the other things on my plate
completed though, I'm not even willing to consider it in a serious
way.  I would rather help by improving Tuxtalk until it is a
satisfactory substitute.

  Kirk

-- 

Kirk Reiser				The Computer Braille Facility
e-mail: kirk@braille.uwo.ca		University of Western Ontario
phone: (519) 661-3061

Re: software speech for speakup

[Geoff Shang]

Hi:

Just a thought.  You wouldn't have to load the whole viavoice thing as a
module would you, just an interface between speakup and the user-space
viavoice program?  Am I talking out my backside here?

Anyway, until modularisation is a reality, supporting viavoice at all is
not a possibility.

Geoff.


-- 
Geoff Shang <gshang10@scu.edu.au>
ICQ number 43634701

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

Judging on what I've seen of emacspeak's implementation, your reasoning seems to be correct.
Greg


On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 10:41:10AM +1000, Geoff Shang wrote:
> Hi:
> 
> Just a thought.  You wouldn't have to load the whole viavoice thing as a
> module would you, just an interface between speakup and the user-space
> viavoice program?  Am I talking out my backside here?
> 
> Anyway, until modularisation is a reality, supporting viavoice at all is
> not a possibility.
> 
> Geoff.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Geoff Shang <gshang10@scu.edu.au>
> ICQ number 43634701
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Reiser]

Hmmm, That's an interesting idea.  I'll let it roll around so to
speak.

  Kirk

-- 

Kirk Reiser				The Computer Braille Facility
e-mail: kirk@braille.uwo.ca		University of Western Ontario
phone: (519) 661-3061

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kerry Hoath]

Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing that message
down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached below.

The fundermental problem with software speech and speakup is this:
speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot process, just after the
console driver or at the same time. At this point; no sound is initialized,
no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet be loaded.
Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the kernel isn't an
option since it would make the kernel image too large and anything in kernel
image is unswappable and consumes memory.
Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
can't even integrate it if we wanted to.

It may be possible to do something like keep speakup asleep until viavoice
is running, and make some shim between speakup and viavoice but this
is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take information
from kernel space (console driver) handle it with speakup, hand it to userspace
to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have that program
synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land sound drivers that we
presume you loaded. This is going to make the performance of the system like
cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods were made by somebody
in the forseeable future, there are many more moving parts to make work.
What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound drivers unload, how
do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the kernel to tell user space
that something ahs gone wrong?
Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
to interact with its talking device and assumes that sound and viavoice are
in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak respawns it.
What you are asking is for speakup to become re-enterant, the ability to put it
to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk to it from user space
despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel code talk back to
user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving away all his
money and becoming a hermit.
Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice tomorrow and coded flat out
until the project was complete it would require months of coding time before
the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and although they hook into
the windows subsystems they are applications like any other. Speakup is in
the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech? Often you are left with
no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is unrestartable. If we were to
have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the kernel becoming
unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
My personal recommendation is to learn how to use emacspeak, preferably from
a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and shell mode.
W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does emacspeak. Once you have this
down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start writing the code
for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing coders <smile>
If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you, it will tide you over
until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
There are other userland screen readers and one supports software speech can't
remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
If we get more coders things might go faster, but until then; you might need
to use another solution for accessability if you have no serial ports.

Regards, Kerry.
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for speakup. I certinly don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so please read on if you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial ports on a PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some earlier posts I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this situation). As a result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the other OS on such a machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting tired of using the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux compatible). I know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software synth that would work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't write anything for IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product. However, as I stated earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to use software speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know that I could use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently downloaded it and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given a choice of access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus, not writing a driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me works without a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly doesn't have to be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would be nice to have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to modify a dectalk or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've taken c++ my junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science). Even so, I have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs work that come with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and hopefully learn more. As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup driver for viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind switching to the opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've wined enough. Kirk, I guess I'm simply asking you if you could possibly consider changing your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for speakup for now at least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me, please write so that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe try to persaude Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> Greg
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

-- 
--
Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
ICQ UIN: 8226547

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

I thought we already had the ability to put speakup to sleep and to wake it
up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic ... I know there are
some of you out there that either have used or are still using emacspeak.
Any recommendations on where to start after the howto if I decide to take
that route until speakup gets software speech? Also, I was thinking of how
to install Linux on such a system without sited help. I've got a braille
blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the blazer's parallel
port, and using the line printer console. However, when I include
"console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses, and I don't
know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon. Any
suggestions? Thanks.
Greg
P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
Subject: Re: software speech for speakup


> Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing that message
> down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached below.
>
> The fundermental problem with software speech and speakup is this:
> speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot process, just after
the
> console driver or at the same time. At this point; no sound is
initialized,
> no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet be loaded.
> Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the kernel isn't an
> option since it would make the kernel image too large and anything in
kernel
> image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
>
> It may be possible to do something like keep speakup asleep until viavoice
> is running, and make some shim between speakup and viavoice but this
> is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take information
> from kernel space (console driver) handle it with speakup, hand it to
userspace
> to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have that program
> synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land sound drivers that
we
> presume you loaded. This is going to make the performance of the system
like
> cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods were made by
somebody
> in the forseeable future, there are many more moving parts to make work.
> What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound drivers unload,
how
> do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the kernel to tell user
space
> that something ahs gone wrong?
> Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> to interact with its talking device and assumes that sound and viavoice
are
> in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak respawns it.
> What you are asking is for speakup to become re-enterant, the ability to
put it
> to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk to it from user
space
> despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel code talk back to
> user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving away all his
> money and becoming a hermit.
> Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice tomorrow and coded flat
out
> until the project was complete it would require months of coding time
before
> the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and although they hook
into
> the windows subsystems they are applications like any other. Speakup is in
> the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech? Often you are left
with
> no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is unrestartable. If we were to
> have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the kernel becoming
> unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> My personal recommendation is to learn how to use emacspeak, preferably
from
> a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and shell mode.
> W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does emacspeak. Once you have
this
> down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start writing the code
> for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing coders <smile>
> If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you, it will tide you
over
> until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> There are other userland screen readers and one supports software speech
can't
> remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> If we get more coders things might go faster, but until then; you might
need
> to use another solution for accessability if you have no serial ports.
>
> Regards, Kerry.
> On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for speakup. I certinly
don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so please read on if
you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial ports on a
PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some earlier posts
I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this situation). As a
result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the other OS on such a
machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting tired of using
the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux compatible). I
know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software synth that would
work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't write anything for
IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product. However, as I stated
earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to use software
speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know that I could
use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently downloaded it
and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given a choice of
access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus, not writing a
driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me works without
a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly doesn't have to
be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would be nice to
have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to modify a dectalk
or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've taken c++ my
junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science). Even so, I
have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs work that come
with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and hopefully learn more.
As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup driver for
viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind switching to the
opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've wined enough.
Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for speakup for now at
least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me, please write so
that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe try to persaude
Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > Greg
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
> --
> --
> Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> ICQ UIN: 8226547
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Wood]

Speakup isn't really put to sleep in the classic sense. It is just told to
shutup. In the present method the code remains active. What will have to
happen is that it can actually stop processing and then later
re-initialize itself.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kerry Hoath]

Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the line printer.
Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there are no flush codes.
You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even then I don't know of anything
other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs speakup does. The blaser
has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I believe it supports
indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser would also be rather bad
since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done installs like that and
it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps 3k of messages out a
port.
If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for installs. One disk error
will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel, but do give it a try :-)

Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't release the numpad and the
review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to completely release
certain consoles including the number pad.
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> I thought we already had the ability to put speakup to sleep and to wake it
> up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic ... I know there are
> some of you out there that either have used or are still using emacspeak.
> Any recommendations on where to start after the howto if I decide to take
> that route until speakup gets software speech? Also, I was thinking of how
> to install Linux on such a system without sited help. I've got a braille
> blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the blazer's parallel
> port, and using the line printer console. However, when I include
> "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses, and I don't
> know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon. Any
> suggestions? Thanks.
> Greg
> P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> 
> 
> > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing that message
> > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached below.
> >
> > The fundermental problem with software speech and speakup is this:
> > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot process, just after
> the
> > console driver or at the same time. At this point; no sound is
> initialized,
> > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet be loaded.
> > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the kernel isn't an
> > option since it would make the kernel image too large and anything in
> kernel
> > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> >
> > It may be possible to do something like keep speakup asleep until viavoice
> > is running, and make some shim between speakup and viavoice but this
> > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take information
> > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with speakup, hand it to
> userspace
> > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have that program
> > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land sound drivers that
> we
> > presume you loaded. This is going to make the performance of the system
> like
> > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods were made by
> somebody
> > in the forseeable future, there are many more moving parts to make work.
> > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound drivers unload,
> how
> > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the kernel to tell user
> space
> > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> > to interact with its talking device and assumes that sound and viavoice
> are
> > in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak respawns it.
> > What you are asking is for speakup to become re-enterant, the ability to
> put it
> > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk to it from user
> space
> > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel code talk back to
> > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving away all his
> > money and becoming a hermit.
> > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice tomorrow and coded flat
> out
> > until the project was complete it would require months of coding time
> before
> > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and although they hook
> into
> > the windows subsystems they are applications like any other. Speakup is in
> > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech? Often you are left
> with
> > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is unrestartable. If we were to
> > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the kernel becoming
> > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use emacspeak, preferably
> from
> > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and shell mode.
> > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does emacspeak. Once you have
> this
> > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start writing the code
> > for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing coders <smile>
> > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you, it will tide you
> over
> > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > There are other userland screen readers and one supports software speech
> can't
> > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > If we get more coders things might go faster, but until then; you might
> need
> > to use another solution for accessability if you have no serial ports.
> >
> > Regards, Kerry.
> > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for speakup. I certinly
> don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so please read on if
> you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial ports on a
> PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some earlier posts
> I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this situation). As a
> result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the other OS on such a
> machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting tired of using
> the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux compatible). I
> know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software synth that would
> work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't write anything for
> IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product. However, as I stated
> earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to use software
> speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know that I could
> use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently downloaded it
> and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given a choice of
> access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus, not writing a
> driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me works without
> a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly doesn't have to
> be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would be nice to
> have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to modify a dectalk
> or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've taken c++ my
> junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science). Even so, I
> have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs work that come
> with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and hopefully learn more.
> As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup driver for
> viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind switching to the
> opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've wined enough.
> Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for speakup for now at
> least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me, please write so
> that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe try to persaude
> Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > Greg
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> > --
> > --
> > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 

-- 
--
Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
ICQ UIN: 8226547

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Reiser]

Just a note, speakup has supportted the bns since December of '99.

  Kirk

-- 

Kirk Reiser				The Computer Braille Facility
e-mail: kirk@braille.uwo.ca		University of Western Ontario
phone: (519) 661-3061

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

Thanks for the interesting info on the blazer. So, it looks like a eyes-free install of Linux is not possible on a machine with no serial ports, right?
Greg

On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:53:11PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the line printer.
> Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there are no flush codes.
> You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even then I don't know of anything
> other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs speakup does. The blaser
> has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I believe it supports
> indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser would also be rather bad
> since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done installs like that and
> it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps 3k of messages out a
> port.
> If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for installs. One disk error
> will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel, but do give it a try :-)
> 
> Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't release the numpad and the
> review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to completely release
> certain consoles including the number pad.
> On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > I thought we already had the ability to put speakup to sleep and to wake it
> > up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic ... I know there are
> > some of you out there that either have used or are still using emacspeak.
> > Any recommendations on where to start after the howto if I decide to take
> > that route until speakup gets software speech? Also, I was thinking of how
> > to install Linux on such a system without sited help. I've got a braille
> > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the blazer's parallel
> > port, and using the line printer console. However, when I include
> > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses, and I don't
> > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon. Any
> > suggestions? Thanks.
> > Greg
> > P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > 
> > 
> > > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing that message
> > > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached below.
> > >
> > > The fundermental problem with software speech and speakup is this:
> > > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot process, just after
> > the
> > > console driver or at the same time. At this point; no sound is
> > initialized,
> > > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> > > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet be loaded.
> > > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the kernel isn't an
> > > option since it would make the kernel image too large and anything in
> > kernel
> > > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> > >
> > > It may be possible to do something like keep speakup asleep until viavoice
> > > is running, and make some shim between speakup and viavoice but this
> > > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take information
> > > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with speakup, hand it to
> > userspace
> > > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have that program
> > > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land sound drivers that
> > we
> > > presume you loaded. This is going to make the performance of the system
> > like
> > > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods were made by
> > somebody
> > > in the forseeable future, there are many more moving parts to make work.
> > > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound drivers unload,
> > how
> > > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the kernel to tell user
> > space
> > > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> > > to interact with its talking device and assumes that sound and viavoice
> > are
> > > in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak respawns it.
> > > What you are asking is for speakup to become re-enterant, the ability to
> > put it
> > > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk to it from user
> > space
> > > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel code talk back to
> > > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving away all his
> > > money and becoming a hermit.
> > > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice tomorrow and coded flat
> > out
> > > until the project was complete it would require months of coding time
> > before
> > > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and although they hook
> > into
> > > the windows subsystems they are applications like any other. Speakup is in
> > > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech? Often you are left
> > with
> > > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is unrestartable. If we were to
> > > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the kernel becoming
> > > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use emacspeak, preferably
> > from
> > > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and shell mode.
> > > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does emacspeak. Once you have
> > this
> > > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start writing the code
> > > for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing coders <smile>
> > > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you, it will tide you
> > over
> > > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > > There are other userland screen readers and one supports software speech
> > can't
> > > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > > If we get more coders things might go faster, but until then; you might
> > need
> > > to use another solution for accessability if you have no serial ports.
> > >
> > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for speakup. I certinly
> > don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so please read on if
> > you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial ports on a
> > PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some earlier posts
> > I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this situation). As a
> > result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the other OS on such a
> > machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting tired of using
> > the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux compatible). I
> > know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software synth that would
> > work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't write anything for
> > IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product. However, as I stated
> > earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to use software
> > speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know that I could
> > use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently downloaded it
> > and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given a choice of
> > access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus, not writing a
> > driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me works without
> > a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly doesn't have to
> > be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would be nice to
> > have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to modify a dectalk
> > or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've taken c++ my
> > junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science). Even so, I
> > have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs work that come
> > with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and hopefully learn more.
> > As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup driver for
> > viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind switching to the
> > opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've wined enough.
> > Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for speakup for now at
> > least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me, please write so
> > that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe try to persaude
> > Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > > Greg
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > --
> > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> > 
> 
> -- 
> --
> Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> ICQ UIN: 8226547
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Speakup -- as a kernel module instead of patch

[Rich Caloggero]

Is this a posibility/probability in the future? Is their a reason why this
is not posible or probable? Are their limitations on which parts of the
kernel can be made modules and which cannot? I assume that the catch is when
do these resources need to be used. SPeakup is needed as soon as posible,
before init starts. Do modules only run after init starts?

                    Rich

----- Original Message -----
From: "Geoff Shang" <gshang@uq.net.au>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: software speech for speakup


> Hi:
>
> Just a thought.  You wouldn't have to load the whole viavoice thing as a
> module would you, just an interface between speakup and the user-space
> viavoice program?  Am I talking out my backside here?
>
> Anyway, until modularisation is a reality, supporting viavoice at all is
> not a possibility.
>
> Geoff.
>
>
> --
> Geoff Shang <gshang10@scu.edu.au>
> ICQ number 43634701
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: software speech for speakup

[Geoff Shang]

On Sun, 13 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:

> blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the blazer's parallel
> port, and using the line printer console. However, when I include
> "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses, and I don't
> know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon. Any

There might be some conflict here with speakup and such options.  When Kirk
so wonderfully wrote the transport driver for me and I compiled speakup
into 2.2.12, I had serial consoles compiled in at the time, though I
hadn't actually set the thing up.  Speakup 0.08 did not like this at all
and oopsed out.  Removing it from my kernel fixed it nicely.  I don't know
if anything has been done about this or not, but it's possible that such
code will not work at all with speakup installed.

Geoff.

Re: Speakup -- as a kernel module instead of patch

[Geoff Shang]

Hi:

Firstly, referring to your subject line, whether speakup is a module or
whether it will allow modularised synth drivers has nothing to do with
whether the source is a patch or not.  The reason speakup is a patch is
that the powers that be have not yet given their blessing to speakup being
included in the standard kernel tree, though Kirk is working on it.  As
such, you have to patch the sources so that it is included in your kernel
compile.

On Mon, 14 May 2001, Rich Caloggero wrote:

> Is this a posibility/probability in the future? Is their a reason why this
> is not posible or probable?

Synth drivers as modules will happen, it's just a matter of when.  Kirk is
working on it, but you have to appreciate that this involves a considerable
reddesign of some of speakup's internals to implement (i.e. it's not a
small job).  I don't know if anyone's ever considered loading speakup
itself as a module.  I'd be a bit curious as to whether there would be any
point to doing this, save for the fact that you would have the ability to
completely unload it, should you want to.  Personally, I avoid modules
wherever possible.

> SPeakup is needed as soon as posible,
> before init starts. Do modules only run after init starts?

My guess would be yes, since init is process 1.  One thing is for certain,
speakup is not going to be able to start talking as early as it currently
does if you use loadable modules.  It will have to start later and the
people who have devices that need to be written as modules (e.g. dec pc)
will just have to live with that.

Geoff.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

I'm using a speakup-free kernel for this with the console on line printer compiled in. The kernel is 2.4.2.
Greg


On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:28:07AM +1000, Geoff Shang wrote:
> On Sun, 13 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> 
> > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the blazer's parallel
> > port, and using the line printer console. However, when I include
> > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses, and I don't
> > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon. Any
> 
> There might be some conflict here with speakup and such options.  When Kirk
> so wonderfully wrote the transport driver for me and I compiled speakup
> into 2.2.12, I had serial consoles compiled in at the time, though I
> hadn't actually set the thing up.  Speakup 0.08 did not like this at all
> and oopsed out.  Removing it from my kernel fixed it nicely.  I don't know
> if anything has been done about this or not, but it's possible that such
> code will not work at all with speakup installed.
> 
> Geoff.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: software speech for speakup

[Scott Howell]

Am I insane or are there really main boards out there with no serial
ports? I'd rid myself of that board immediately.<grin>

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

Can't do that since I got the barebones system a year ago before I ever dreamed of using Linux as opposed to the simetimes unstable but still great Ms Windows 98 SE OS.
Greg


On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 07:31:07PM -0400, Scott Howell wrote:
> Am I insane or are there really main boards out there with no serial
> ports? I'd rid myself of that board immediately.<grin>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Wood]

On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 07:31:07PM -0400, Scott Howell wrote:
> Am I insane or are there really main boards out there with no serial
> ports? I'd rid myself of that board immediately.<grin>

Hate to say this, but the attitude is what sets back accesibility in the
first place. Yes, I would suggest avoiding this if buying new equipment
and you have a serial synth. But this is the future. The fact is that a
serial port is a resource hog. Perhaps preasure should instead be put on
manufactures to offer other access means such as PCI and USB synths.

Before anyone starts on USB, it is very possible to detect some hardware
on the port before init starts. Keyboards and mice are both capable of
support in BIOS. There is no reason another device couldn't piggyback the
same means.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kerry Hoath]

Not at this stage. Serial ports are necessary for us to get speech 
and none of the install systems I know of come up with parallel consoles or
software speech. SUSE does do braille I hear though
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:04AM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> Thanks for the interesting info on the blazer. So, it looks like a eyes-free install of Linux is not possible on a machine with no serial ports, right?
> Greg
> 
> On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:53:11PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the line printer.
> > Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there are no flush codes.
> > You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even then I don't know of anything
> > other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs speakup does. The blaser
> > has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I believe it supports
> > indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser would also be rather bad
> > since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done installs like that and
> > it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps 3k of messages out a
> > port.
> > If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for installs. One disk error
> > will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel, but do give it a try :-)
> > 
> > Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't release the numpad and the
> > review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to completely release
> > certain consoles including the number pad.
> > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > I thought we already had the ability to put speakup to sleep and to wake it
> > > up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic ... I know there are
> > > some of you out there that either have used or are still using emacspeak.
> > > Any recommendations on where to start after the howto if I decide to take
> > > that route until speakup gets software speech? Also, I was thinking of how
> > > to install Linux on such a system without sited help. I've got a braille
> > > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the blazer's parallel
> > > port, and using the line printer console. However, when I include
> > > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses, and I don't
> > > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon. Any
> > > suggestions? Thanks.
> > > Greg
> > > P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing that message
> > > > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached below.
> > > >
> > > > The fundermental problem with software speech and speakup is this:
> > > > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot process, just after
> > > the
> > > > console driver or at the same time. At this point; no sound is
> > > initialized,
> > > > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> > > > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet be loaded.
> > > > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the kernel isn't an
> > > > option since it would make the kernel image too large and anything in
> > > kernel
> > > > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > > > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > > > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> > > >
> > > > It may be possible to do something like keep speakup asleep until viavoice
> > > > is running, and make some shim between speakup and viavoice but this
> > > > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take information
> > > > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with speakup, hand it to
> > > userspace
> > > > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have that program
> > > > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land sound drivers that
> > > we
> > > > presume you loaded. This is going to make the performance of the system
> > > like
> > > > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods were made by
> > > somebody
> > > > in the forseeable future, there are many more moving parts to make work.
> > > > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound drivers unload,
> > > how
> > > > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the kernel to tell user
> > > space
> > > > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > > > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> > > > to interact with its talking device and assumes that sound and viavoice
> > > are
> > > > in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak respawns it.
> > > > What you are asking is for speakup to become re-enterant, the ability to
> > > put it
> > > > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk to it from user
> > > space
> > > > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel code talk back to
> > > > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > > > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving away all his
> > > > money and becoming a hermit.
> > > > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice tomorrow and coded flat
> > > out
> > > > until the project was complete it would require months of coding time
> > > before
> > > > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > > > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and although they hook
> > > into
> > > > the windows subsystems they are applications like any other. Speakup is in
> > > > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > > > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech? Often you are left
> > > with
> > > > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is unrestartable. If we were to
> > > > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the kernel becoming
> > > > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > > > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use emacspeak, preferably
> > > from
> > > > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and shell mode.
> > > > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does emacspeak. Once you have
> > > this
> > > > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start writing the code
> > > > for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing coders <smile>
> > > > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you, it will tide you
> > > over
> > > > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > > > There are other userland screen readers and one supports software speech
> > > can't
> > > > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > > > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > > > If we get more coders things might go faster, but until then; you might
> > > need
> > > > to use another solution for accessability if you have no serial ports.
> > > >
> > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > Hi All,
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for speakup. I certinly
> > > don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so please read on if
> > > you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial ports on a
> > > PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some earlier posts
> > > I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this situation). As a
> > > result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the other OS on such a
> > > machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting tired of using
> > > the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux compatible). I
> > > know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software synth that would
> > > work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't write anything for
> > > IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product. However, as I stated
> > > earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to use software
> > > speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know that I could
> > > use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently downloaded it
> > > and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given a choice of
> > > access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus, not writing a
> > > driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me works without
> > > a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly doesn't have to
> > > be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would be nice to
> > > have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to modify a dectalk
> > > or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've taken c++ my
> > > junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science). Even so, I
> > > have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs work that come
> > > with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and hopefully learn more.
> > > As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup driver for
> > > viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind switching to the
> > > opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've wined enough.
> > > Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > > > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for speakup for now at
> > > least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me, please write so
> > > that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe try to persaude
> > > Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > > > Greg
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > --
> > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > --
> > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 

-- 
--
Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
ICQ UIN: 8226547

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

There already is an improved version of the doubletalk pc that is available for both the pci and usb bus.
Greg


On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:03:26PM -0500, Kirk Wood wrote:
> On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 07:31:07PM -0400, Scott Howell wrote:
> > Am I insane or are there really main boards out there with no serial
> > ports? I'd rid myself of that board immediately.<grin>
> 
> Hate to say this, but the attitude is what sets back accesibility in the
> first place. Yes, I would suggest avoiding this if buying new equipment
> and you have a serial synth. But this is the future. The fact is that a
> serial port is a resource hog. Perhaps preasure should instead be put on
> manufactures to offer other access means such as PCI and USB synths.
> 
> Before anyone starts on USB, it is very possible to detect some hardware
> on the port before init starts. Keyboards and mice are both capable of
> support in BIOS. There is no reason another device couldn't piggyback the
> same means.
> 
> =======
> Kirk Wood
> Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> 
> Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

Guess I'll stick with the other OS on that machine perhaps until 2010 if need be (grin)
Greg


On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:22:59PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> Not at this stage. Serial ports are necessary for us to get speech 
> and none of the install systems I know of come up with parallel consoles or
> software speech. SUSE does do braille I hear though
> On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:04AM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > Thanks for the interesting info on the blazer. So, it looks like a eyes-free install of Linux is not possible on a machine with no serial ports, right?
> > Greg
> > 
> > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:53:11PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the line printer.
> > > Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there are no flush codes.
> > > You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even then I don't know of anything
> > > other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs speakup does. The blaser
> > > has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I believe it supports
> > > indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser would also be rather bad
> > > since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done installs like that and
> > > it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps 3k of messages out a
> > > port.
> > > If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for installs. One disk error
> > > will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel, but do give it a try :-)
> > > 
> > > Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't release the numpad and the
> > > review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to completely release
> > > certain consoles including the number pad.
> > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > I thought we already had the ability to put speakup to sleep and to wake it
> > > > up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic ... I know there are
> > > > some of you out there that either have used or are still using emacspeak.
> > > > Any recommendations on where to start after the howto if I decide to take
> > > > that route until speakup gets software speech? Also, I was thinking of how
> > > > to install Linux on such a system without sited help. I've got a braille
> > > > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the blazer's parallel
> > > > port, and using the line printer console. However, when I include
> > > > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses, and I don't
> > > > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon. Any
> > > > suggestions? Thanks.
> > > > Greg
> > > > P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> > > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing that message
> > > > > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached below.
> > > > >
> > > > > The fundermental problem with software speech and speakup is this:
> > > > > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot process, just after
> > > > the
> > > > > console driver or at the same time. At this point; no sound is
> > > > initialized,
> > > > > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> > > > > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet be loaded.
> > > > > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the kernel isn't an
> > > > > option since it would make the kernel image too large and anything in
> > > > kernel
> > > > > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > > > > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > > > > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> > > > >
> > > > > It may be possible to do something like keep speakup asleep until viavoice
> > > > > is running, and make some shim between speakup and viavoice but this
> > > > > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take information
> > > > > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with speakup, hand it to
> > > > userspace
> > > > > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have that program
> > > > > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land sound drivers that
> > > > we
> > > > > presume you loaded. This is going to make the performance of the system
> > > > like
> > > > > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods were made by
> > > > somebody
> > > > > in the forseeable future, there are many more moving parts to make work.
> > > > > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound drivers unload,
> > > > how
> > > > > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the kernel to tell user
> > > > space
> > > > > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > > > > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> > > > > to interact with its talking device and assumes that sound and viavoice
> > > > are
> > > > > in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak respawns it.
> > > > > What you are asking is for speakup to become re-enterant, the ability to
> > > > put it
> > > > > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk to it from user
> > > > space
> > > > > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel code talk back to
> > > > > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > > > > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving away all his
> > > > > money and becoming a hermit.
> > > > > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice tomorrow and coded flat
> > > > out
> > > > > until the project was complete it would require months of coding time
> > > > before
> > > > > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > > > > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and although they hook
> > > > into
> > > > > the windows subsystems they are applications like any other. Speakup is in
> > > > > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > > > > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech? Often you are left
> > > > with
> > > > > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is unrestartable. If we were to
> > > > > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the kernel becoming
> > > > > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > > > > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use emacspeak, preferably
> > > > from
> > > > > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and shell mode.
> > > > > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does emacspeak. Once you have
> > > > this
> > > > > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start writing the code
> > > > > for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing coders <smile>
> > > > > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you, it will tide you
> > > > over
> > > > > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > > > > There are other userland screen readers and one supports software speech
> > > > can't
> > > > > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > > > > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > > > > If we get more coders things might go faster, but until then; you might
> > > > need
> > > > > to use another solution for accessability if you have no serial ports.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for speakup. I certinly
> > > > don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so please read on if
> > > > you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial ports on a
> > > > PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some earlier posts
> > > > I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this situation). As a
> > > > result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the other OS on such a
> > > > machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting tired of using
> > > > the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux compatible). I
> > > > know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software synth that would
> > > > work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't write anything for
> > > > IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product. However, as I stated
> > > > earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to use software
> > > > speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know that I could
> > > > use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently downloaded it
> > > > and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given a choice of
> > > > access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus, not writing a
> > > > driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me works without
> > > > a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly doesn't have to
> > > > be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would be nice to
> > > > have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to modify a dectalk
> > > > or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've taken c++ my
> > > > junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science). Even so, I
> > > > have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs work that come
> > > > with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and hopefully learn more.
> > > > As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup driver for
> > > > viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind switching to the
> > > > opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've wined enough.
> > > > Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > > > > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for speakup for now at
> > > > least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me, please write so
> > > > that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe try to persaude
> > > > Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > > > > Greg
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > --
> > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > --
> > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> > 
> 
> -- 
> --
> Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> ICQ UIN: 8226547
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: software speech for speakup

[Shaun Oliver]

ok now for my 20c worth. 
What the hell is the deal with having software speech or not? In a way I
would prefer it when there is simply no other means of speech output but,
it has it's limitations.
1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of system
resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
2: Remember that if you do go down the path of software synthesys, you
won't have  speech right from the get go when you first turn your machine
on.
That's all I wanna say at this point. I don't know much else about but
thought I'd add my thoughts on the matter.


Shaun..
"Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Tue, 15 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:

> Guess I'll stick with the other OS on that machine perhaps until 2010 if need be (grin)
> Greg
> 
> 
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:22:59PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > Not at this stage. Serial ports are necessary for us to get speech 
> > and none of the install systems I know of come up with parallel consoles or
> > software speech. SUSE does do braille I hear though
> > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:04AM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > Thanks for the interesting info on the blazer. So, it looks like a eyes-free install of Linux is not possible on a machine with no serial ports, right?
> > > Greg
> > > 
> > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:53:11PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the line printer.
> > > > Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there are no flush codes.
> > > > You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even then I don't know of anything
> > > > other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs speakup does. The blaser
> > > > has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I believe it supports
> > > > indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser would also be rather bad
> > > > since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done installs like that and
> > > > it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps 3k of messages out a
> > > > port.
> > > > If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for installs. One disk error
> > > > will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel, but do give it a try :-)
> > > > 
> > > > Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't release the numpad and the
> > > > review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to completely release
> > > > certain consoles including the number pad.
> > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > I thought we already had the ability to put speakup to sleep and to wake it
> > > > > up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic ... I know there are
> > > > > some of you out there that either have used or are still using emacspeak.
> > > > > Any recommendations on where to start after the howto if I decide to take
> > > > > that route until speakup gets software speech? Also, I was thinking of how
> > > > > to install Linux on such a system without sited help. I've got a braille
> > > > > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the blazer's parallel
> > > > > port, and using the line printer console. However, when I include
> > > > > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses, and I don't
> > > > > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon. Any
> > > > > suggestions? Thanks.
> > > > > Greg
> > > > > P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> > > > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing that message
> > > > > > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached below.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The fundermental problem with software speech and speakup is this:
> > > > > > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot process, just after
> > > > > the
> > > > > > console driver or at the same time. At this point; no sound is
> > > > > initialized,
> > > > > > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> > > > > > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet be loaded.
> > > > > > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the kernel isn't an
> > > > > > option since it would make the kernel image too large and anything in
> > > > > kernel
> > > > > > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > > > > > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > > > > > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It may be possible to do something like keep speakup asleep until viavoice
> > > > > > is running, and make some shim between speakup and viavoice but this
> > > > > > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take information
> > > > > > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with speakup, hand it to
> > > > > userspace
> > > > > > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have that program
> > > > > > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land sound drivers that
> > > > > we
> > > > > > presume you loaded. This is going to make the performance of the system
> > > > > like
> > > > > > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods were made by
> > > > > somebody
> > > > > > in the forseeable future, there are many more moving parts to make work.
> > > > > > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound drivers unload,
> > > > > how
> > > > > > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the kernel to tell user
> > > > > space
> > > > > > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > > > > > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> > > > > > to interact with its talking device and assumes that sound and viavoice
> > > > > are
> > > > > > in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak respawns it.
> > > > > > What you are asking is for speakup to become re-enterant, the ability to
> > > > > put it
> > > > > > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk to it from user
> > > > > space
> > > > > > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel code talk back to
> > > > > > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > > > > > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving away all his
> > > > > > money and becoming a hermit.
> > > > > > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice tomorrow and coded flat
> > > > > out
> > > > > > until the project was complete it would require months of coding time
> > > > > before
> > > > > > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > > > > > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and although they hook
> > > > > into
> > > > > > the windows subsystems they are applications like any other. Speakup is in
> > > > > > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > > > > > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech? Often you are left
> > > > > with
> > > > > > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is unrestartable. If we were to
> > > > > > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the kernel becoming
> > > > > > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > > > > > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use emacspeak, preferably
> > > > > from
> > > > > > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and shell mode.
> > > > > > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does emacspeak. Once you have
> > > > > this
> > > > > > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start writing the code
> > > > > > for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing coders <smile>
> > > > > > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you, it will tide you
> > > > > over
> > > > > > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > > > > > There are other userland screen readers and one supports software speech
> > > > > can't
> > > > > > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > > > > > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > > > > > If we get more coders things might go faster, but until then; you might
> > > > > need
> > > > > > to use another solution for accessability if you have no serial ports.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for speakup. I certinly
> > > > > don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so please read on if
> > > > > you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial ports on a
> > > > > PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some earlier posts
> > > > > I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this situation). As a
> > > > > result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the other OS on such a
> > > > > machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting tired of using
> > > > > the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux compatible). I
> > > > > know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software synth that would
> > > > > work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't write anything for
> > > > > IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product. However, as I stated
> > > > > earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to use software
> > > > > speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know that I could
> > > > > use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently downloaded it
> > > > > and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given a choice of
> > > > > access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus, not writing a
> > > > > driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me works without
> > > > > a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly doesn't have to
> > > > > be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would be nice to
> > > > > have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to modify a dectalk
> > > > > or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've taken c++ my
> > > > > junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science). Even so, I
> > > > > have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs work that come
> > > > > with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and hopefully learn more.
> > > > > As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup driver for
> > > > > viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind switching to the
> > > > > opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've wined enough.
> > > > > Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > > > > > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for speakup for now at
> > > > > least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me, please write so
> > > > > that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe try to persaude
> > > > > Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > 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
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > -- 
> > > > --
> > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > --
> > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: software speech for speakup

[Janina Sajka]

I'll tell you why software speech is a big deal to me. I spend a lot of
time on the road. Because I work for a non-profit agency, I'm not
usually in First Class when I'm on the airplane. I'm frequently locked
into a hotel conference room with anywhere from 20 to 200 other people.
Sometimes I have a table to spread my computer out on. Often, I just
have my lap. For me, software speech means that I can use linux and
speakup with just a headphone--nothing else. Today, it's just a lot more
complicated because there's that additional device, and that cable that
attaches that additional device to the computer. So, today, when I don't
have table space, I run emacspeak with ViaVoice--but I'd sure like to
have the speakup option, too.

PS: When I'm on the road, I don't usually care if speech starts at the
very beginning of the boot process. Mostly, I don't even boot, but
rather use the suspend/resume feature of my laptop which, by the way,
works pretty well with ViaVoice.

On Wed, 16 May 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:

> ok now for my 20c worth.
> What the hell is the deal with having software speech or not? In a way I
> would prefer it when there is simply no other means of speech output but,
> it has it's limitations.
> 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of system
> resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> 2: Remember that if you do go down the path of software synthesys, you
> won't have  speech right from the get go when you first turn your machine
> on.
> That's all I wanna say at this point. I don't know much else about but
> thought I'd add my thoughts on the matter.
>
>
> Shaun..
> "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
> EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
> www.jong.com:6667
>
> On Tue, 15 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
>
> > Guess I'll stick with the other OS on that machine perhaps until 2010 if need be (grin)
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:22:59PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > Not at this stage. Serial ports are necessary for us to get speech
> > > and none of the install systems I know of come up with parallel consoles or
> > > software speech. SUSE does do braille I hear though
> > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:04AM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > Thanks for the interesting info on the blazer. So, it looks like a eyes-free install of Linux is not possible on a machine with no serial ports, right?
> > > > Greg
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:53:11PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the line printer.
> > > > > Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there are no flush codes.
> > > > > You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even then I don't know of anything
> > > > > other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs speakup does. The blaser
> > > > > has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I believe it supports
> > > > > indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser would also be rather bad
> > > > > since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done installs like that and
> > > > > it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps 3k of messages out a
> > > > > port.
> > > > > If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for installs. One disk error
> > > > > will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel, but do give it a try :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't release the numpad and the
> > > > > review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to completely release
> > > > > certain consoles including the number pad.
> > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > I thought we already had the ability to put speakup to sleep and to wake it
> > > > > > up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic ... I know there are
> > > > > > some of you out there that either have used or are still using emacspeak.
> > > > > > Any recommendations on where to start after the howto if I decide to take
> > > > > > that route until speakup gets software speech? Also, I was thinking of how
> > > > > > to install Linux on such a system without sited help. I've got a braille
> > > > > > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the blazer's parallel
> > > > > > port, and using the line printer console. However, when I include
> > > > > > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses, and I don't
> > > > > > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon. Any
> > > > > > suggestions? Thanks.
> > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> > > > > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> > > > > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing that message
> > > > > > > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached below.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The fundermental problem with software speech and speakup is this:
> > > > > > > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot process, just after
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > console driver or at the same time. At this point; no sound is
> > > > > > initialized,
> > > > > > > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> > > > > > > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet be loaded.
> > > > > > > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the kernel isn't an
> > > > > > > option since it would make the kernel image too large and anything in
> > > > > > kernel
> > > > > > > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > > > > > > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > > > > > > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It may be possible to do something like keep speakup asleep until viavoice
> > > > > > > is running, and make some shim between speakup and viavoice but this
> > > > > > > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take information
> > > > > > > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with speakup, hand it to
> > > > > > userspace
> > > > > > > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have that program
> > > > > > > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land sound drivers that
> > > > > > we
> > > > > > > presume you loaded. This is going to make the performance of the system
> > > > > > like
> > > > > > > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods were made by
> > > > > > somebody
> > > > > > > in the forseeable future, there are many more moving parts to make work.
> > > > > > > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound drivers unload,
> > > > > > how
> > > > > > > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the kernel to tell user
> > > > > > space
> > > > > > > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > > > > > > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> > > > > > > to interact with its talking device and assumes that sound and viavoice
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > > in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak respawns it.
> > > > > > > What you are asking is for speakup to become re-enterant, the ability to
> > > > > > put it
> > > > > > > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk to it from user
> > > > > > space
> > > > > > > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel code talk back to
> > > > > > > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > > > > > > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving away all his
> > > > > > > money and becoming a hermit.
> > > > > > > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice tomorrow and coded flat
> > > > > > out
> > > > > > > until the project was complete it would require months of coding time
> > > > > > before
> > > > > > > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > > > > > > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and although they hook
> > > > > > into
> > > > > > > the windows subsystems they are applications like any other. Speakup is in
> > > > > > > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > > > > > > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech? Often you are left
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is unrestartable. If we were to
> > > > > > > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the kernel becoming
> > > > > > > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > > > > > > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use emacspeak, preferably
> > > > > > from
> > > > > > > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and shell mode.
> > > > > > > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does emacspeak. Once you have
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start writing the code
> > > > > > > for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing coders <smile>
> > > > > > > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you, it will tide you
> > > > > > over
> > > > > > > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > > > > > > There are other userland screen readers and one supports software speech
> > > > > > can't
> > > > > > > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > > > > > > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > > > > > > If we get more coders things might go faster, but until then; you might
> > > > > > need
> > > > > > > to use another solution for accessability if you have no serial ports.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for speakup. I certinly
> > > > > > don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so please read on if
> > > > > > you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial ports on a
> > > > > > PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some earlier posts
> > > > > > I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this situation). As a
> > > > > > result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the other OS on such a
> > > > > > machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting tired of using
> > > > > > the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux compatible). I
> > > > > > know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software synth that would
> > > > > > work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't write anything for
> > > > > > IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product. However, as I stated
> > > > > > earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to use software
> > > > > > speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know that I could
> > > > > > use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently downloaded it
> > > > > > and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given a choice of
> > > > > > access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus, not writing a
> > > > > > driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me works without
> > > > > > a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly doesn't have to
> > > > > > be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would be nice to
> > > > > > have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to modify a dectalk
> > > > > > or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've taken c++ my
> > > > > > junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science). Even so, I
> > > > > > have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs work that come
> > > > > > with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and hopefully learn more.
> > > > > > As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup driver for
> > > > > > viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind switching to the
> > > > > > opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've wined enough.
> > > > > > Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > > > > > > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for speakup for now at
> > > > > > least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me, please write so
> > > > > > that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe try to persaude
> > > > > > Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > 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
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > --
> > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > --
> > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

-- 

				Janina Sajka, Director
				Technology Research and Development
				Governmental Relations Group
				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)

Email: janina@afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175

Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper, Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html

Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin Luther King Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp

Learn how to make accessible software at http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

Thanks Janina, there is finally someone else here that knows exactly what I'm talking about. 
Greg


On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 12:33:01PM -0400, Janina Sajka wrote:
> I'll tell you why software speech is a big deal to me. I spend a lot of
> time on the road. Because I work for a non-profit agency, I'm not
> usually in First Class when I'm on the airplane. I'm frequently locked
> into a hotel conference room with anywhere from 20 to 200 other people.
> Sometimes I have a table to spread my computer out on. Often, I just
> have my lap. For me, software speech means that I can use linux and
> speakup with just a headphone--nothing else. Today, it's just a lot more
> complicated because there's that additional device, and that cable that
> attaches that additional device to the computer. So, today, when I don't
> have table space, I run emacspeak with ViaVoice--but I'd sure like to
> have the speakup option, too.
> 
> PS: When I'm on the road, I don't usually care if speech starts at the
> very beginning of the boot process. Mostly, I don't even boot, but
> rather use the suspend/resume feature of my laptop which, by the way,
> works pretty well with ViaVoice.
> 
> On Wed, 16 May 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> 
> > ok now for my 20c worth.
> > What the hell is the deal with having software speech or not? In a way I
> > would prefer it when there is simply no other means of speech output but,
> > it has it's limitations.
> > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of system
> > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> > 2: Remember that if you do go down the path of software synthesys, you
> > won't have  speech right from the get go when you first turn your machine
> > on.
> > That's all I wanna say at this point. I don't know much else about but
> > thought I'd add my thoughts on the matter.
> >
> >
> > Shaun..
> > "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
> > EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> > YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
> > www.jong.com:6667
> >
> > On Tue, 15 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> >
> > > Guess I'll stick with the other OS on that machine perhaps until 2010 if need be (grin)
> > > Greg
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:22:59PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > Not at this stage. Serial ports are necessary for us to get speech
> > > > and none of the install systems I know of come up with parallel consoles or
> > > > software speech. SUSE does do braille I hear though
> > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:04AM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > Thanks for the interesting info on the blazer. So, it looks like a eyes-free install of Linux is not possible on a machine with no serial ports, right?
> > > > > Greg
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:53:11PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > > Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the line printer.
> > > > > > Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there are no flush codes.
> > > > > > You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even then I don't know of anything
> > > > > > other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs speakup does. The blaser
> > > > > > has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I believe it supports
> > > > > > indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser would also be rather bad
> > > > > > since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done installs like that and
> > > > > > it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps 3k of messages out a
> > > > > > port.
> > > > > > If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for installs. One disk error
> > > > > > will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel, but do give it a try :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't release the numpad and the
> > > > > > review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to completely release
> > > > > > certain consoles including the number pad.
> > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > I thought we already had the ability to put speakup to sleep and to wake it
> > > > > > > up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic ... I know there are
> > > > > > > some of you out there that either have used or are still using emacspeak.
> > > > > > > Any recommendations on where to start after the howto if I decide to take
> > > > > > > that route until speakup gets software speech? Also, I was thinking of how
> > > > > > > to install Linux on such a system without sited help. I've got a braille
> > > > > > > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the blazer's parallel
> > > > > > > port, and using the line printer console. However, when I include
> > > > > > > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses, and I don't
> > > > > > > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon. Any
> > > > > > > suggestions? Thanks.
> > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> > > > > > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing that message
> > > > > > > > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached below.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The fundermental problem with software speech and speakup is this:
> > > > > > > > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot process, just after
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > console driver or at the same time. At this point; no sound is
> > > > > > > initialized,
> > > > > > > > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> > > > > > > > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet be loaded.
> > > > > > > > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the kernel isn't an
> > > > > > > > option since it would make the kernel image too large and anything in
> > > > > > > kernel
> > > > > > > > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > > > > > > > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > > > > > > > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It may be possible to do something like keep speakup asleep until viavoice
> > > > > > > > is running, and make some shim between speakup and viavoice but this
> > > > > > > > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take information
> > > > > > > > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with speakup, hand it to
> > > > > > > userspace
> > > > > > > > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have that program
> > > > > > > > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land sound drivers that
> > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > presume you loaded. This is going to make the performance of the system
> > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods were made by
> > > > > > > somebody
> > > > > > > > in the forseeable future, there are many more moving parts to make work.
> > > > > > > > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound drivers unload,
> > > > > > > how
> > > > > > > > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the kernel to tell user
> > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > > > > > > > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> > > > > > > > to interact with its talking device and assumes that sound and viavoice
> > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak respawns it.
> > > > > > > > What you are asking is for speakup to become re-enterant, the ability to
> > > > > > > put it
> > > > > > > > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk to it from user
> > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel code talk back to
> > > > > > > > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > > > > > > > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving away all his
> > > > > > > > money and becoming a hermit.
> > > > > > > > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice tomorrow and coded flat
> > > > > > > out
> > > > > > > > until the project was complete it would require months of coding time
> > > > > > > before
> > > > > > > > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > > > > > > > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and although they hook
> > > > > > > into
> > > > > > > > the windows subsystems they are applications like any other. Speakup is in
> > > > > > > > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > > > > > > > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech? Often you are left
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is unrestartable. If we were to
> > > > > > > > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the kernel becoming
> > > > > > > > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > > > > > > > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use emacspeak, preferably
> > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and shell mode.
> > > > > > > > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does emacspeak. Once you have
> > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start writing the code
> > > > > > > > for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing coders <smile>
> > > > > > > > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you, it will tide you
> > > > > > > over
> > > > > > > > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > > > > > > > There are other userland screen readers and one supports software speech
> > > > > > > can't
> > > > > > > > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > > > > > > > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > > > > > > > If we get more coders things might go faster, but until then; you might
> > > > > > > need
> > > > > > > > to use another solution for accessability if you have no serial ports.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for speakup. I certinly
> > > > > > > don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so please read on if
> > > > > > > you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial ports on a
> > > > > > > PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some earlier posts
> > > > > > > I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this situation). As a
> > > > > > > result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the other OS on such a
> > > > > > > machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting tired of using
> > > > > > > the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux compatible). I
> > > > > > > know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software synth that would
> > > > > > > work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't write anything for
> > > > > > > IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product. However, as I stated
> > > > > > > earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to use software
> > > > > > > speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know that I could
> > > > > > > use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently downloaded it
> > > > > > > and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given a choice of
> > > > > > > access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus, not writing a
> > > > > > > driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me works without
> > > > > > > a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly doesn't have to
> > > > > > > be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would be nice to
> > > > > > > have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to modify a dectalk
> > > > > > > or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've taken c++ my
> > > > > > > junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science). Even so, I
> > > > > > > have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs work that come
> > > > > > > with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and hopefully learn more.
> > > > > > > As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup driver for
> > > > > > > viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind switching to the
> > > > > > > opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've wined enough.
> > > > > > > Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > > > > > > > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for speakup for now at
> > > > > > > least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me, please write so
> > > > > > > that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe try to persaude
> > > > > > > Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > --
> > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> -- 
> 
> 				Janina Sajka, Director
> 				Technology Research and Development
> 				Governmental Relations Group
> 				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)
> 
> Email: janina@afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175
> 
> Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper, Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html
> 
> Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin Luther King Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
> http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp
> 
> Learn how to make accessible software at http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: software speech for speakup

[Victor Tsaran]

Guys, you all perfectly understand that there is no way to have Speakup use
software synthesizer from the very start of the machine. So, why this
discussion at all?
Actually, I recall that superslim notebook computers, such as Sonny Viao,
play a sound through their sound card at the very beginning of boot process.
So, perhaps, theoretically it should be possible if all PC's could
initialize the sound card in a similar way. But this is not so...
Best,
Victor

----- Original Message -----
From: "Janina Sajka" <janina@afb.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: software speech for speakup


> I'll tell you why software speech is a big deal to me. I spend a lot of
> time on the road. Because I work for a non-profit agency, I'm not
> usually in First Class when I'm on the airplane. I'm frequently locked
> into a hotel conference room with anywhere from 20 to 200 other people.
> Sometimes I have a table to spread my computer out on. Often, I just
> have my lap. For me, software speech means that I can use linux and
> speakup with just a headphone--nothing else. Today, it's just a lot more
> complicated because there's that additional device, and that cable that
> attaches that additional device to the computer. So, today, when I don't
> have table space, I run emacspeak with ViaVoice--but I'd sure like to
> have the speakup option, too.
>
> PS: When I'm on the road, I don't usually care if speech starts at the
> very beginning of the boot process. Mostly, I don't even boot, but
> rather use the suspend/resume feature of my laptop which, by the way,
> works pretty well with ViaVoice.
>
> On Wed, 16 May 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
>
> > ok now for my 20c worth.
> > What the hell is the deal with having software speech or not? In a way I
> > would prefer it when there is simply no other means of speech output
but,
> > it has it's limitations.
> > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of
system
> > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> > 2: Remember that if you do go down the path of software synthesys, you
> > won't have  speech right from the get go when you first turn your
machine
> > on.
> > That's all I wanna say at this point. I don't know much else about but
> > thought I'd add my thoughts on the matter.
> >
> >
> > Shaun..
> > "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
> > EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> > YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends
on
> > www.jong.com:6667
> >
> > On Tue, 15 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> >
> > > Guess I'll stick with the other OS on that machine perhaps until 2010
if need be (grin)
> > > Greg
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:22:59PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > Not at this stage. Serial ports are necessary for us to get speech
> > > > and none of the install systems I know of come up with parallel
consoles or
> > > > software speech. SUSE does do braille I hear though
> > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:04AM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > Thanks for the interesting info on the blazer. So, it looks like a
eyes-free install of Linux is not possible on a machine with no serial
ports, right?
> > > > > Greg
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:53:11PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > > Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the line
printer.
> > > > > > Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there are no
flush codes.
> > > > > > You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even then I
don't know of anything
> > > > > > other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs speakup
does. The blaser
> > > > > > has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I believe it
supports
> > > > > > indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser would also
be rather bad
> > > > > > since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done installs
like that and
> > > > > > it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps 3k of
messages out a
> > > > > > port.
> > > > > > If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for installs.
One disk error
> > > > > > will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel, but do
give it a try :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't release the
numpad and the
> > > > > > review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to
completely release
> > > > > > certain consoles including the number pad.
> > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > I thought we already had the ability to put speakup to sleep
and to wake it
> > > > > > > up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic ... I
know there are
> > > > > > > some of you out there that either have used or are still using
emacspeak.
> > > > > > > Any recommendations on where to start after the howto if I
decide to take
> > > > > > > that route until speakup gets software speech? Also, I was
thinking of how
> > > > > > > to install Linux on such a system without sited help. I've got
a braille
> > > > > > > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the
blazer's parallel
> > > > > > > port, and using the line printer console. However, when I
include
> > > > > > > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses,
and I don't
> > > > > > > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon.
Any
> > > > > > > suggestions? Thanks.
> > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> > > > > > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing that
message
> > > > > > > > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached
below.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The fundermental problem with software speech and speakup is
this:
> > > > > > > > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot process,
just after
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > console driver or at the same time. At this point; no sound
is
> > > > > > > initialized,
> > > > > > > > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> > > > > > > > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet be
loaded.
> > > > > > > > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the
kernel isn't an
> > > > > > > > option since it would make the kernel image too large and
anything in
> > > > > > > kernel
> > > > > > > > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > > > > > > > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > > > > > > > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It may be possible to do something like keep speakup asleep
until viavoice
> > > > > > > > is running, and make some shim between speakup and viavoice
but this
> > > > > > > > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take
information
> > > > > > > > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with speakup,
hand it to
> > > > > > > userspace
> > > > > > > > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have
that program
> > > > > > > > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land sound
drivers that
> > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > presume you loaded. This is going to make the performance of
the system
> > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods were
made by
> > > > > > > somebody
> > > > > > > > in the forseeable future, there are many more moving parts
to make work.
> > > > > > > > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound
drivers unload,
> > > > > > > how
> > > > > > > > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the kernel
to tell user
> > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > > > > > > > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> > > > > > > > to interact with its talking device and assumes that sound
and viavoice
> > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak
respawns it.
> > > > > > > > What you are asking is for speakup to become re-enterant,
the ability to
> > > > > > > put it
> > > > > > > > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk to
it from user
> > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel code
talk back to
> > > > > > > > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > > > > > > > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving
away all his
> > > > > > > > money and becoming a hermit.
> > > > > > > > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice tomorrow
and coded flat
> > > > > > > out
> > > > > > > > until the project was complete it would require months of
coding time
> > > > > > > before
> > > > > > > > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > > > > > > > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and
although they hook
> > > > > > > into
> > > > > > > > the windows subsystems they are applications like any other.
Speakup is in
> > > > > > > > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > > > > > > > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech? Often
you are left
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is unrestartable.
If we were to
> > > > > > > > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the
kernel becoming
> > > > > > > > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > > > > > > > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use emacspeak,
preferably
> > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and shell
mode.
> > > > > > > > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does emacspeak.
Once you have
> > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start
writing the code
> > > > > > > > for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing
coders <smile>
> > > > > > > > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you, it
will tide you
> > > > > > > over
> > > > > > > > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > > > > > > > There are other userland screen readers and one supports
software speech
> > > > > > > can't
> > > > > > > > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > > > > > > > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > > > > > > > If we get more coders things might go faster, but until
then; you might
> > > > > > > need
> > > > > > > > to use another solution for accessability if you have no
serial ports.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for
speakup. I certinly
> > > > > > > don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so
please read on if
> > > > > > > you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial
ports on a
> > > > > > > PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some
earlier posts
> > > > > > > I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this
situation). As a
> > > > > > > result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the
other OS on such a
> > > > > > > machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting
tired of using
> > > > > > > the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux
compatible). I
> > > > > > > know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software
synth that would
> > > > > > > work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't
write anything for
> > > > > > > IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product.
However, as I stated
> > > > > > > earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to
use software
> > > > > > > speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know
that I could
> > > > > > > use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently
downloaded it
> > > > > > > and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given
a choice of
> > > > > > > access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus,
not writing a
> > > > > > > driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me
works without
> > > > > > > a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly
doesn't have to
> > > > > > > be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would
be nice to
> > > > > > > have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to
modify a dectalk
> > > > > > > or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've
taken c++ my
> > > > > > > junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science).
Even so, I
> > > > > > > have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs
work that come
> > > > > > > with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and
hopefully learn more.
> > > > > > > As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup
driver for
> > > > > > > viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind
switching to the
> > > > > > > opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've
wined enough.
> > > > > > > Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > > > > > > > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for
speakup for now at
> > > > > > > least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me,
please write so
> > > > > > > that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe
try to persaude
> > > > > > > Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > --
> > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
> --
>
> Janina Sajka, Director
> Technology Research and Development
> Governmental Relations Group
> American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)
>
> Email: janina@afb.net Phone: (202) 408-8175
>
> Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper,
Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html
>
> Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin Luther King
Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
> http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp
>
> Learn how to make accessible software at
http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Wood]

On Wed, 16 May 2001, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> Guys, you all perfectly understand that there is no way to have Speakup use
> software synthesizer from the very start of the machine. So, why this
> discussion at all?

The discussion isn't about having speech from start of boot through the
sound card. The discussion is about having the option of using sound for
speech synthesis at all. I think the discussion allready acknowledged that
it would have to wait till later in the boot process.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

RE: software speech for speakup

[Stephen Dawes]

Janina,

I like your answer, I to use a laptop, and find the use of additional
hardware bothersome, and thus only run linux on it when I am at home.  I
would very much like to have everything contained in the laptop, but for
now...

When it happens, I will be right there to test it out.  However, I don't
want to loose the current level of speech during boot time.  I would think
that there must be a way to launch the sound as part of the kernel boot
process so that a module could be launched to provide soft speech.

Just my $0.25 Canadian, or $0.15 C US on the subject.



Stephen Dawes B.A. B.Sc.
Web Business Office, The City of Calgary
PHONE:  (403) 268-5527. FAX: (403) 268-6423
E-MAIL ADDRESS:  sdawes@gov.calgary.ab.ca




> -----Original Message-----
> From: speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca
> [mailto:speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca]On Behalf Of Janina Sajka
> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 10:33 AM
> To: speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
>
>
> I'll tell you why software speech is a big deal to me. I spend a lot of
> time on the road. Because I work for a non-profit agency, I'm not
> usually in First Class when I'm on the airplane. I'm frequently locked
> into a hotel conference room with anywhere from 20 to 200 other people.
> Sometimes I have a table to spread my computer out on. Often, I just
> have my lap. For me, software speech means that I can use linux and
> speakup with just a headphone--nothing else. Today, it's just a lot more
> complicated because there's that additional device, and that cable that
> attaches that additional device to the computer. So, today, when I don't
> have table space, I run emacspeak with ViaVoice--but I'd sure like to
> have the speakup option, too.
>
> PS: When I'm on the road, I don't usually care if speech starts at the
> very beginning of the boot process. Mostly, I don't even boot, but
> rather use the suspend/resume feature of my laptop which, by the way,
> works pretty well with ViaVoice.
>
> On Wed, 16 May 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
>
> > ok now for my 20c worth.
> > What the hell is the deal with having software speech or not? In a way I
> > would prefer it when there is simply no other means of speech
> output but,
> > it has it's limitations.
> > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great
> deal of system
> > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> > 2: Remember that if you do go down the path of software synthesys, you
> > won't have  speech right from the get go when you first turn
> your machine
> > on.
> > That's all I wanna say at this point. I don't know much else about but
> > thought I'd add my thoughts on the matter.
> >
> >
> > Shaun..
> > "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
> > EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> > YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on
> #aussiefriends on
> > www.jong.com:6667
> >
> > On Tue, 15 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> >
> > > Guess I'll stick with the other OS on that machine perhaps
> until 2010 if need be (grin)
> > > Greg
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:22:59PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > Not at this stage. Serial ports are necessary for us to get speech
> > > > and none of the install systems I know of come up with
> parallel consoles or
> > > > software speech. SUSE does do braille I hear though
> > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:04AM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > Thanks for the interesting info on the blazer. So, it
> looks like a eyes-free install of Linux is not possible on a
> machine with no serial ports, right?
> > > > > Greg
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:53:11PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > > Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the
> line printer.
> > > > > > Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there
> are no flush codes.
> > > > > > You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even
> then I don't know of anything
> > > > > > other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs
> speakup does. The blaser
> > > > > > has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I
> believe it supports
> > > > > > indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser
> would also be rather bad
> > > > > > since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done
> installs like that and
> > > > > > it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps
> 3k of messages out a
> > > > > > port.
> > > > > > If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for
> installs. One disk error
> > > > > > will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel,
> but do give it a try :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't
> release the numpad and the
> > > > > > review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to
> completely release
> > > > > > certain consoles including the number pad.
> > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > I thought we already had the ability to put speakup
> to sleep and to wake it
> > > > > > > up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic
> ... I know there are
> > > > > > > some of you out there that either have used or are
> still using emacspeak.
> > > > > > > Any recommendations on where to start after the howto
> if I decide to take
> > > > > > > that route until speakup gets software speech? Also,
> I was thinking of how
> > > > > > > to install Linux on such a system without sited help.
> I've got a braille
> > > > > > > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through
> the blazer's parallel
> > > > > > > port, and using the line printer console. However,
> when I include
> > > > > > > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel
> oopses, and I don't
> > > > > > > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after
> logon. Any
> > > > > > > suggestions? Thanks.
> > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> > > > > > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be
> slicing that message
> > > > > > > > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains
> attached below.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The fundermental problem with software speech and
> speakup is this:
> > > > > > > > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot
> process, just after
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > console driver or at the same time. At this point;
> no sound is
> > > > > > > initialized,
> > > > > > > > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> > > > > > > > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't
> yet be loaded.
> > > > > > > > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it
> into the kernel isn't an
> > > > > > > > option since it would make the kernel image too
> large and anything in
> > > > > > > kernel
> > > > > > > > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > > > > > > > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > > > > > > > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It may be possible to do something like keep
> speakup asleep until viavoice
> > > > > > > > is running, and make some shim between speakup and
> viavoice but this
> > > > > > > > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take
> information
> > > > > > > > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with
> speakup, hand it to
> > > > > > > userspace
> > > > > > > > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore,
> have that program
> > > > > > > > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel
> land sound drivers that
> > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > presume you loaded. This is going to make the
> performance of the system
> > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup
> mods were made by
> > > > > > > somebody
> > > > > > > > in the forseeable future, there are many more
> moving parts to make work.
> > > > > > > > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or
> sound drivers unload,
> > > > > > > how
> > > > > > > > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell
> the kernel to tell user
> > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > > > > > > > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> > > > > > > > to interact with its talking device and assumes
> that sound and viavoice
> > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > in top shape. When the speech server crashes
> emacspeak respawns it.
> > > > > > > > What you are asking is for speakup to become
> re-enterant, the ability to
> > > > > > > put it
> > > > > > > > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to
> talk to it from user
> > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that
> kernel code talk back to
> > > > > > > > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > > > > > > > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates
> giving away all his
> > > > > > > > money and becoming a hermit.
> > > > > > > > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice
> tomorrow and coded flat
> > > > > > > out
> > > > > > > > until the project was complete it would require
> months of coding time
> > > > > > > before
> > > > > > > > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > > > > > > > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land
> and although they hook
> > > > > > > into
> > > > > > > > the windows subsystems they are applications like
> any other. Speakup is in
> > > > > > > > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > > > > > > > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your
> speech? Often you are left
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is
> unrestartable. If we were to
> > > > > > > > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of
> the kernel becoming
> > > > > > > > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > > > > > > > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use
> emacspeak, preferably
> > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and
> shell mode.
> > > > > > > > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does
> emacspeak. Once you have
> > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to
> start writing the code
> > > > > > > > for speakup and take some of the weight off the
> existing coders <smile>
> > > > > > > > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for
> you, it will tide you
> > > > > > > over
> > > > > > > > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > > > > > > > There are other userland screen readers and one
> supports software speech
> > > > > > > can't
> > > > > > > > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > > > > > > > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > > > > > > > If we get more coders things might go faster, but
> until then; you might
> > > > > > > need
> > > > > > > > to use another solution for accessability if you
> have no serial ports.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory
> Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech
> for speakup. I certinly
> > > > > > > don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize
> here, so please read on if
> > > > > > > you're interested. There are some of us that don't
> have serial ports on a
> > > > > > > PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux
> (based on some earlier posts
> > > > > > > I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this
> situation). As a
> > > > > > > result, I would personally like to entirely blow away
> the other OS on such a
> > > > > > > machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm
> getting tired of using
> > > > > > > the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is
> Linux compatible). I
> > > > > > > know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a
> software synth that would
> > > > > > > work with speakup in the far future, and that he
> wouldn't write anything for
> > > > > > > IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource
> product. However, as I stated
> > > > > > > earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be
> able to use software
> > > > > > > speech with speakup in the very soon future (now).
> Yes, I know that I could
> > > > > > > use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've
> recently downloaded it
> > > > > > > and played with it for two days (even read  the
> howto). Given a choice of
> > > > > > > access though, I would much rather stick with
> speakup. Thus, not writing a
> > > > > > > driver for a product that is not opensource (and so
> far for me works without
> > > > > > > a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup
> certinly doesn't have to
> > > > > > > be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but
> it would be nice to
> > > > > > > have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that
> hard to modify a dectalk
> > > > > > > or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech
> engine. I've taken c++ my
> > > > > > > junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer
> science). Even so, I
> > > > > > > have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample
> programs work that come
> > > > > > > with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs,
> and hopefully learn more.
> > > > > > > As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the
> speakup driver for
> > > > > > > viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly
> wouldn't mind switching to the
> > > > > > > opensource engine when it became usable. However ...
> ok, I've wined enough.
> > > > > > > Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > > > > > > > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine
> for speakup for now at
> > > > > > > least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with
> me, please write so
> > > > > > > that we could see how many more takers there are, and
> maybe try to persaude
> > > > > > > Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > --
> > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
>
> --
>
> 				Janina Sajka, Director
> 				Technology Research and Development
> 				Governmental Relations Group
> 				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)
>
> Email: janina@afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175
>
> Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper,
> Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html
>
> Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin
> Luther King Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
> http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp
>
> Learn how to make accessible software at
> http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

RE: software speech for speakup

[Janina Sajka]

Well, how and when sound is launched on any system just depends on what
all has to be loaded first. Clearly, one can custom write something that
plays a sound at any point, but that isn't the same as reading text
messages which, theoretically, might say anything.

It seems that we need to remember that all of those lovely messages,
including the ones that pop up even before Speakup--and yes, there are a
few that pop up before speakup--all of these are in the logs.

So, I think the compromise has to be that if you want to hear them
realtime you simply hook up an external synth. And, if you want to run
without cumbersome umbilicals, software speech is the way to go--but it
will happen later in the boot process.

On Wed, 16 May 2001, Stephen Dawes wrote:

> Janina,
>
> I like your answer, I to use a laptop, and find the use of additional
> hardware bothersome, and thus only run linux on it when I am at home.  I
> would very much like to have everything contained in the laptop, but for
> now...
>
> When it happens, I will be right there to test it out.  However, I don't
> want to loose the current level of speech during boot time.  I would think
> that there must be a way to launch the sound as part of the kernel boot
> process so that a module could be launched to provide soft speech.
>
> Just my $0.25 Canadian, or $0.15 C US on the subject.
>
>
>
> Stephen Dawes B.A. B.Sc.
> Web Business Office, The City of Calgary
> PHONE:  (403) 268-5527. FAX: (403) 268-6423
> E-MAIL ADDRESS:  sdawes@gov.calgary.ab.ca
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca
> > [mailto:speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca]On Behalf Of Janina Sajka
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 10:33 AM
> > To: speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> >
> >
> > I'll tell you why software speech is a big deal to me. I spend a lot of
> > time on the road. Because I work for a non-profit agency, I'm not
> > usually in First Class when I'm on the airplane. I'm frequently locked
> > into a hotel conference room with anywhere from 20 to 200 other people.
> > Sometimes I have a table to spread my computer out on. Often, I just
> > have my lap. For me, software speech means that I can use linux and
> > speakup with just a headphone--nothing else. Today, it's just a lot more
> > complicated because there's that additional device, and that cable that
> > attaches that additional device to the computer. So, today, when I don't
> > have table space, I run emacspeak with ViaVoice--but I'd sure like to
> > have the speakup option, too.
> >
> > PS: When I'm on the road, I don't usually care if speech starts at the
> > very beginning of the boot process. Mostly, I don't even boot, but
> > rather use the suspend/resume feature of my laptop which, by the way,
> > works pretty well with ViaVoice.
> >
> > On Wed, 16 May 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> >
> > > ok now for my 20c worth.
> > > What the hell is the deal with having software speech or not? In a way I
> > > would prefer it when there is simply no other means of speech
> > output but,
> > > it has it's limitations.
> > > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great
> > deal of system
> > > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> > > 2: Remember that if you do go down the path of software synthesys, you
> > > won't have  speech right from the get go when you first turn
> > your machine
> > > on.
> > > That's all I wanna say at this point. I don't know much else about but
> > > thought I'd add my thoughts on the matter.
> > >
> > >
> > > Shaun..
> > > "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
> > > EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> > > YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on
> > #aussiefriends on
> > > www.jong.com:6667
> > >
> > > On Tue, 15 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > >
> > > > Guess I'll stick with the other OS on that machine perhaps
> > until 2010 if need be (grin)
> > > > Greg
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:22:59PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > Not at this stage. Serial ports are necessary for us to get speech
> > > > > and none of the install systems I know of come up with
> > parallel consoles or
> > > > > software speech. SUSE does do braille I hear though
> > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:04AM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > Thanks for the interesting info on the blazer. So, it
> > looks like a eyes-free install of Linux is not possible on a
> > machine with no serial ports, right?
> > > > > > Greg
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:53:11PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > > > Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the
> > line printer.
> > > > > > > Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there
> > are no flush codes.
> > > > > > > You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even
> > then I don't know of anything
> > > > > > > other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs
> > speakup does. The blaser
> > > > > > > has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I
> > believe it supports
> > > > > > > indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser
> > would also be rather bad
> > > > > > > since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done
> > installs like that and
> > > > > > > it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps
> > 3k of messages out a
> > > > > > > port.
> > > > > > > If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for
> > installs. One disk error
> > > > > > > will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel,
> > but do give it a try :-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't
> > release the numpad and the
> > > > > > > review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to
> > completely release
> > > > > > > certain consoles including the number pad.
> > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > > I thought we already had the ability to put speakup
> > to sleep and to wake it
> > > > > > > > up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic
> > ... I know there are
> > > > > > > > some of you out there that either have used or are
> > still using emacspeak.
> > > > > > > > Any recommendations on where to start after the howto
> > if I decide to take
> > > > > > > > that route until speakup gets software speech? Also,
> > I was thinking of how
> > > > > > > > to install Linux on such a system without sited help.
> > I've got a braille
> > > > > > > > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through
> > the blazer's parallel
> > > > > > > > port, and using the line printer console. However,
> > when I include
> > > > > > > > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel
> > oopses, and I don't
> > > > > > > > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after
> > logon. Any
> > > > > > > > suggestions? Thanks.
> > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> > > > > > > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be
> > slicing that message
> > > > > > > > > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains
> > attached below.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The fundermental problem with software speech and
> > speakup is this:
> > > > > > > > > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot
> > process, just after
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > console driver or at the same time. At this point;
> > no sound is
> > > > > > > > initialized,
> > > > > > > > > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> > > > > > > > > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't
> > yet be loaded.
> > > > > > > > > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it
> > into the kernel isn't an
> > > > > > > > > option since it would make the kernel image too
> > large and anything in
> > > > > > > > kernel
> > > > > > > > > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > > > > > > > > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > > > > > > > > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It may be possible to do something like keep
> > speakup asleep until viavoice
> > > > > > > > > is running, and make some shim between speakup and
> > viavoice but this
> > > > > > > > > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take
> > information
> > > > > > > > > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with
> > speakup, hand it to
> > > > > > > > userspace
> > > > > > > > > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore,
> > have that program
> > > > > > > > > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel
> > land sound drivers that
> > > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > presume you loaded. This is going to make the
> > performance of the system
> > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup
> > mods were made by
> > > > > > > > somebody
> > > > > > > > > in the forseeable future, there are many more
> > moving parts to make work.
> > > > > > > > > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or
> > sound drivers unload,
> > > > > > > > how
> > > > > > > > > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell
> > the kernel to tell user
> > > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > > > > > > > > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> > > > > > > > > to interact with its talking device and assumes
> > that sound and viavoice
> > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > in top shape. When the speech server crashes
> > emacspeak respawns it.
> > > > > > > > > What you are asking is for speakup to become
> > re-enterant, the ability to
> > > > > > > > put it
> > > > > > > > > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to
> > talk to it from user
> > > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that
> > kernel code talk back to
> > > > > > > > > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > > > > > > > > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates
> > giving away all his
> > > > > > > > > money and becoming a hermit.
> > > > > > > > > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice
> > tomorrow and coded flat
> > > > > > > > out
> > > > > > > > > until the project was complete it would require
> > months of coding time
> > > > > > > > before
> > > > > > > > > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > > > > > > > > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land
> > and although they hook
> > > > > > > > into
> > > > > > > > > the windows subsystems they are applications like
> > any other. Speakup is in
> > > > > > > > > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > > > > > > > > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your
> > speech? Often you are left
> > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is
> > unrestartable. If we were to
> > > > > > > > > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of
> > the kernel becoming
> > > > > > > > > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > > > > > > > > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use
> > emacspeak, preferably
> > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and
> > shell mode.
> > > > > > > > > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does
> > emacspeak. Once you have
> > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to
> > start writing the code
> > > > > > > > > for speakup and take some of the weight off the
> > existing coders <smile>
> > > > > > > > > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for
> > you, it will tide you
> > > > > > > > over
> > > > > > > > > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > > > > > > > > There are other userland screen readers and one
> > supports software speech
> > > > > > > > can't
> > > > > > > > > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > > > > > > > > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > > > > > > > > If we get more coders things might go faster, but
> > until then; you might
> > > > > > > > need
> > > > > > > > > to use another solution for accessability if you
> > have no serial ports.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory
> > Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech
> > for speakup. I certinly
> > > > > > > > don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize
> > here, so please read on if
> > > > > > > > you're interested. There are some of us that don't
> > have serial ports on a
> > > > > > > > PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux
> > (based on some earlier posts
> > > > > > > > I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this
> > situation). As a
> > > > > > > > result, I would personally like to entirely blow away
> > the other OS on such a
> > > > > > > > machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm
> > getting tired of using
> > > > > > > > the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is
> > Linux compatible). I
> > > > > > > > know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a
> > software synth that would
> > > > > > > > work with speakup in the far future, and that he
> > wouldn't write anything for
> > > > > > > > IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource
> > product. However, as I stated
> > > > > > > > earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be
> > able to use software
> > > > > > > > speech with speakup in the very soon future (now).
> > Yes, I know that I could
> > > > > > > > use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've
> > recently downloaded it
> > > > > > > > and played with it for two days (even read  the
> > howto). Given a choice of
> > > > > > > > access though, I would much rather stick with
> > speakup. Thus, not writing a
> > > > > > > > driver for a product that is not opensource (and so
> > far for me works without
> > > > > > > > a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup
> > certinly doesn't have to
> > > > > > > > be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but
> > it would be nice to
> > > > > > > > have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that
> > hard to modify a dectalk
> > > > > > > > or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech
> > engine. I've taken c++ my
> > > > > > > > junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer
> > science). Even so, I
> > > > > > > > have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample
> > programs work that come
> > > > > > > > with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs,
> > and hopefully learn more.
> > > > > > > > As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the
> > speakup driver for
> > > > > > > > viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly
> > wouldn't mind switching to the
> > > > > > > > opensource engine when it became usable. However ...
> > ok, I've wined enough.
> > > > > > > > Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > > > > > > > > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine
> > for speakup for now at
> > > > > > > > least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with
> > me, please write so
> > > > > > > > that we could see how many more takers there are, and
> > maybe try to persaude
> > > > > > > > Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > 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
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > --
> > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> > --
> >
> > 				Janina Sajka, Director
> > 				Technology Research and Development
> > 				Governmental Relations Group
> > 				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)
> >
> > Email: janina@afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175
> >
> > Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper,
> > Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html
> >
> > Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin
> > Luther King Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
> > http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp
> >
> > Learn how to make accessible software at
> > http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>

-- 

				Janina Sajka, Director
				Technology Research and Development
				Governmental Relations Group
				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)

Email: janina@afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175

Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper, Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html

Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin Luther King Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp

Learn how to make accessible software at http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

This discussion is because I for one don't care about the boot messages as long as I'm able to get speech when the login prompt comes up. I can always view the boot messages with dmesg if I want.
Greg


On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 09:47:22PM +0200, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> Guys, you all perfectly understand that there is no way to have Speakup use
> software synthesizer from the very start of the machine. So, why this
> discussion at all?
> Actually, I recall that superslim notebook computers, such as Sonny Viao,
> play a sound through their sound card at the very beginning of boot process.
> So, perhaps, theoretically it should be possible if all PC's could
> initialize the sound card in a similar way. But this is not so...
> Best,
> Victor
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Janina Sajka" <janina@afb.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 6:33 PM
> Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> 
> 
> > I'll tell you why software speech is a big deal to me. I spend a lot of
> > time on the road. Because I work for a non-profit agency, I'm not
> > usually in First Class when I'm on the airplane. I'm frequently locked
> > into a hotel conference room with anywhere from 20 to 200 other people.
> > Sometimes I have a table to spread my computer out on. Often, I just
> > have my lap. For me, software speech means that I can use linux and
> > speakup with just a headphone--nothing else. Today, it's just a lot more
> > complicated because there's that additional device, and that cable that
> > attaches that additional device to the computer. So, today, when I don't
> > have table space, I run emacspeak with ViaVoice--but I'd sure like to
> > have the speakup option, too.
> >
> > PS: When I'm on the road, I don't usually care if speech starts at the
> > very beginning of the boot process. Mostly, I don't even boot, but
> > rather use the suspend/resume feature of my laptop which, by the way,
> > works pretty well with ViaVoice.
> >
> > On Wed, 16 May 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> >
> > > ok now for my 20c worth.
> > > What the hell is the deal with having software speech or not? In a way I
> > > would prefer it when there is simply no other means of speech output
> but,
> > > it has it's limitations.
> > > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of
> system
> > > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> > > 2: Remember that if you do go down the path of software synthesys, you
> > > won't have  speech right from the get go when you first turn your
> machine
> > > on.
> > > That's all I wanna say at this point. I don't know much else about but
> > > thought I'd add my thoughts on the matter.
> > >
> > >
> > > Shaun..
> > > "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
> > > EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> > > YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends
> on
> > > www.jong.com:6667
> > >
> > > On Tue, 15 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > >
> > > > Guess I'll stick with the other OS on that machine perhaps until 2010
> if need be (grin)
> > > > Greg
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:22:59PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > Not at this stage. Serial ports are necessary for us to get speech
> > > > > and none of the install systems I know of come up with parallel
> consoles or
> > > > > software speech. SUSE does do braille I hear though
> > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:04AM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > Thanks for the interesting info on the blazer. So, it looks like a
> eyes-free install of Linux is not possible on a machine with no serial
> ports, right?
> > > > > > Greg
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:53:11PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > > > Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the line
> printer.
> > > > > > > Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there are no
> flush codes.
> > > > > > > You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even then I
> don't know of anything
> > > > > > > other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs speakup
> does. The blaser
> > > > > > > has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I believe it
> supports
> > > > > > > indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser would also
> be rather bad
> > > > > > > since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done installs
> like that and
> > > > > > > it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps 3k of
> messages out a
> > > > > > > port.
> > > > > > > If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for installs.
> One disk error
> > > > > > > will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel, but do
> give it a try :-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't release the
> numpad and the
> > > > > > > review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to
> completely release
> > > > > > > certain consoles including the number pad.
> > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > > I thought we already had the ability to put speakup to sleep
> and to wake it
> > > > > > > > up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic ... I
> know there are
> > > > > > > > some of you out there that either have used or are still using
> emacspeak.
> > > > > > > > Any recommendations on where to start after the howto if I
> decide to take
> > > > > > > > that route until speakup gets software speech? Also, I was
> thinking of how
> > > > > > > > to install Linux on such a system without sited help. I've got
> a braille
> > > > > > > > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the
> blazer's parallel
> > > > > > > > port, and using the line printer console. However, when I
> include
> > > > > > > > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses,
> and I don't
> > > > > > > > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon.
> Any
> > > > > > > > suggestions? Thanks.
> > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> > > > > > > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing that
> message
> > > > > > > > > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached
> below.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The fundermental problem with software speech and speakup is
> this:
> > > > > > > > > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot process,
> just after
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > console driver or at the same time. At this point; no sound
> is
> > > > > > > > initialized,
> > > > > > > > > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> > > > > > > > > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet be
> loaded.
> > > > > > > > > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the
> kernel isn't an
> > > > > > > > > option since it would make the kernel image too large and
> anything in
> > > > > > > > kernel
> > > > > > > > > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > > > > > > > > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > > > > > > > > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It may be possible to do something like keep speakup asleep
> until viavoice
> > > > > > > > > is running, and make some shim between speakup and viavoice
> but this
> > > > > > > > > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take
> information
> > > > > > > > > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with speakup,
> hand it to
> > > > > > > > userspace
> > > > > > > > > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have
> that program
> > > > > > > > > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land sound
> drivers that
> > > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > presume you loaded. This is going to make the performance of
> the system
> > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods were
> made by
> > > > > > > > somebody
> > > > > > > > > in the forseeable future, there are many more moving parts
> to make work.
> > > > > > > > > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound
> drivers unload,
> > > > > > > > how
> > > > > > > > > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the kernel
> to tell user
> > > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > > > > > > > > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> > > > > > > > > to interact with its talking device and assumes that sound
> and viavoice
> > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak
> respawns it.
> > > > > > > > > What you are asking is for speakup to become re-enterant,
> the ability to
> > > > > > > > put it
> > > > > > > > > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk to
> it from user
> > > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel code
> talk back to
> > > > > > > > > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > > > > > > > > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving
> away all his
> > > > > > > > > money and becoming a hermit.
> > > > > > > > > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice tomorrow
> and coded flat
> > > > > > > > out
> > > > > > > > > until the project was complete it would require months of
> coding time
> > > > > > > > before
> > > > > > > > > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > > > > > > > > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and
> although they hook
> > > > > > > > into
> > > > > > > > > the windows subsystems they are applications like any other.
> Speakup is in
> > > > > > > > > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > > > > > > > > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech? Often
> you are left
> > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is unrestartable.
> If we were to
> > > > > > > > > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the
> kernel becoming
> > > > > > > > > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > > > > > > > > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use emacspeak,
> preferably
> > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and shell
> mode.
> > > > > > > > > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does emacspeak.
> Once you have
> > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start
> writing the code
> > > > > > > > > for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing
> coders <smile>
> > > > > > > > > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you, it
> will tide you
> > > > > > > > over
> > > > > > > > > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > > > > > > > > There are other userland screen readers and one supports
> software speech
> > > > > > > > can't
> > > > > > > > > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > > > > > > > > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > > > > > > > > If we get more coders things might go faster, but until
> then; you might
> > > > > > > > need
> > > > > > > > > to use another solution for accessability if you have no
> serial ports.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for
> speakup. I certinly
> > > > > > > > don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so
> please read on if
> > > > > > > > you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial
> ports on a
> > > > > > > > PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some
> earlier posts
> > > > > > > > I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this
> situation). As a
> > > > > > > > result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the
> other OS on such a
> > > > > > > > machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting
> tired of using
> > > > > > > > the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux
> compatible). I
> > > > > > > > know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software
> synth that would
> > > > > > > > work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't
> write anything for
> > > > > > > > IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product.
> However, as I stated
> > > > > > > > earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to
> use software
> > > > > > > > speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know
> that I could
> > > > > > > > use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently
> downloaded it
> > > > > > > > and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given
> a choice of
> > > > > > > > access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus,
> not writing a
> > > > > > > > driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me
> works without
> > > > > > > > a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly
> doesn't have to
> > > > > > > > be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would
> be nice to
> > > > > > > > have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to
> modify a dectalk
> > > > > > > > or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've
> taken c++ my
> > > > > > > > junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science).
> Even so, I
> > > > > > > > have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs
> work that come
> > > > > > > > with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and
> hopefully learn more.
> > > > > > > > As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup
> driver for
> > > > > > > > viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind
> switching to the
> > > > > > > > opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've
> wined enough.
> > > > > > > > Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > > > > > > > > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for
> speakup for now at
> > > > > > > > least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me,
> please write so
> > > > > > > > that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe
> try to persaude
> > > > > > > > Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > 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
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > --
> > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Janina Sajka, Director
> > Technology Research and Development
> > Governmental Relations Group
> > American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)
> >
> > Email: janina@afb.net Phone: (202) 408-8175
> >
> > Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper,
> Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html
> >
> > Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin Luther King
> Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
> > http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp
> >
> > Learn how to make accessible software at
> http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: software speech for speakup

[Charles Hallenbeck]

You can only get the boot messages with dmesg if the system finishes 
booting. If the boot process fails you are SOL!

On Wed, 16 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:

> This discussion is because I for one don't care about the boot messages as long as I'm able to get speech when the login prompt comes up. I can always view the boot messages with dmesg if I want.
> Greg
> 
> 
> On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 09:47:22PM +0200, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> > Guys, you all perfectly understand that there is no way to have Speakup use
> > software synthesizer from the very start of the machine. So, why this
> > discussion at all?
> > Actually, I recall that superslim notebook computers, such as Sonny Viao,
> > play a sound through their sound card at the very beginning of boot process.
> > So, perhaps, theoretically it should be possible if all PC's could
> > initialize the sound card in a similar way. But this is not so...
> > Best,
> > Victor
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Janina Sajka" <janina@afb.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 6:33 PM
> > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > 
> > 
> > > I'll tell you why software speech is a big deal to me. I spend a lot of
> > > time on the road. Because I work for a non-profit agency, I'm not
> > > usually in First Class when I'm on the airplane. I'm frequently locked
> > > into a hotel conference room with anywhere from 20 to 200 other people.
> > > Sometimes I have a table to spread my computer out on. Often, I just
> > > have my lap. For me, software speech means that I can use linux and
> > > speakup with just a headphone--nothing else. Today, it's just a lot more
> > > complicated because there's that additional device, and that cable that
> > > attaches that additional device to the computer. So, today, when I don't
> > > have table space, I run emacspeak with ViaVoice--but I'd sure like to
> > > have the speakup option, too.
> > >
> > > PS: When I'm on the road, I don't usually care if speech starts at the
> > > very beginning of the boot process. Mostly, I don't even boot, but
> > > rather use the suspend/resume feature of my laptop which, by the way,
> > > works pretty well with ViaVoice.
> > >
> > > On Wed, 16 May 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> > >
> > > > ok now for my 20c worth.
> > > > What the hell is the deal with having software speech or not? In a way I
> > > > would prefer it when there is simply no other means of speech output
> > but,
> > > > it has it's limitations.
> > > > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of
> > system
> > > > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> > > > 2: Remember that if you do go down the path of software synthesys, you
> > > > won't have  speech right from the get go when you first turn your
> > machine
> > > > on.
> > > > That's all I wanna say at this point. I don't know much else about but
> > > > thought I'd add my thoughts on the matter.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Shaun..
> > > > "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
> > > > EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> > > > YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends
> > on
> > > > www.jong.com:6667
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 15 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Guess I'll stick with the other OS on that machine perhaps until 2010
> > if need be (grin)
> > > > > Greg
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:22:59PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > > Not at this stage. Serial ports are necessary for us to get speech
> > > > > > and none of the install systems I know of come up with parallel
> > consoles or
> > > > > > software speech. SUSE does do braille I hear though
> > > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:04AM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > Thanks for the interesting info on the blazer. So, it looks like a
> > eyes-free install of Linux is not possible on a machine with no serial
> > ports, right?
> > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:53:11PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > > > > Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the line
> > printer.
> > > > > > > > Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there are no
> > flush codes.
> > > > > > > > You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even then I
> > don't know of anything
> > > > > > > > other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs speakup
> > does. The blaser
> > > > > > > > has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I believe it
> > supports
> > > > > > > > indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser would also
> > be rather bad
> > > > > > > > since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done installs
> > like that and
> > > > > > > > it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps 3k of
> > messages out a
> > > > > > > > port.
> > > > > > > > If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for installs.
> > One disk error
> > > > > > > > will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel, but do
> > give it a try :-)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't release the
> > numpad and the
> > > > > > > > review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to
> > completely release
> > > > > > > > certain consoles including the number pad.
> > > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I thought we already had the ability to put speakup to sleep
> > and to wake it
> > > > > > > > > up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic ... I
> > know there are
> > > > > > > > > some of you out there that either have used or are still using
> > emacspeak.
> > > > > > > > > Any recommendations on where to start after the howto if I
> > decide to take
> > > > > > > > > that route until speakup gets software speech? Also, I was
> > thinking of how
> > > > > > > > > to install Linux on such a system without sited help. I've got
> > a braille
> > > > > > > > > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the
> > blazer's parallel
> > > > > > > > > port, and using the line printer console. However, when I
> > include
> > > > > > > > > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses,
> > and I don't
> > > > > > > > > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon.
> > Any
> > > > > > > > > suggestions? Thanks.
> > > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > > P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> > > > > > > > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing that
> > message
> > > > > > > > > > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached
> > below.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The fundermental problem with software speech and speakup is
> > this:
> > > > > > > > > > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot process,
> > just after
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > console driver or at the same time. At this point; no sound
> > is
> > > > > > > > > initialized,
> > > > > > > > > > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> > > > > > > > > > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet be
> > loaded.
> > > > > > > > > > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the
> > kernel isn't an
> > > > > > > > > > option since it would make the kernel image too large and
> > anything in
> > > > > > > > > kernel
> > > > > > > > > > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > > > > > > > > > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > > > > > > > > > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > It may be possible to do something like keep speakup asleep
> > until viavoice
> > > > > > > > > > is running, and make some shim between speakup and viavoice
> > but this
> > > > > > > > > > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take
> > information
> > > > > > > > > > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with speakup,
> > hand it to
> > > > > > > > > userspace
> > > > > > > > > > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have
> > that program
> > > > > > > > > > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land sound
> > drivers that
> > > > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > > presume you loaded. This is going to make the performance of
> > the system
> > > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods were
> > made by
> > > > > > > > > somebody
> > > > > > > > > > in the forseeable future, there are many more moving parts
> > to make work.
> > > > > > > > > > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound
> > drivers unload,
> > > > > > > > > how
> > > > > > > > > > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the kernel
> > to tell user
> > > > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > > > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > > > > > > > > > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> > > > > > > > > > to interact with its talking device and assumes that sound
> > and viavoice
> > > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > > in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak
> > respawns it.
> > > > > > > > > > What you are asking is for speakup to become re-enterant,
> > the ability to
> > > > > > > > > put it
> > > > > > > > > > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk to
> > it from user
> > > > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > > > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel code
> > talk back to
> > > > > > > > > > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > > > > > > > > > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving
> > away all his
> > > > > > > > > > money and becoming a hermit.
> > > > > > > > > > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice tomorrow
> > and coded flat
> > > > > > > > > out
> > > > > > > > > > until the project was complete it would require months of
> > coding time
> > > > > > > > > before
> > > > > > > > > > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > > > > > > > > > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and
> > although they hook
> > > > > > > > > into
> > > > > > > > > > the windows subsystems they are applications like any other.
> > Speakup is in
> > > > > > > > > > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > > > > > > > > > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech? Often
> > you are left
> > > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is unrestartable.
> > If we were to
> > > > > > > > > > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the
> > kernel becoming
> > > > > > > > > > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > > > > > > > > > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use emacspeak,
> > preferably
> > > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > > > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and shell
> > mode.
> > > > > > > > > > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does emacspeak.
> > Once you have
> > > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start
> > writing the code
> > > > > > > > > > for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing
> > coders <smile>
> > > > > > > > > > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you, it
> > will tide you
> > > > > > > > > over
> > > > > > > > > > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > > > > > > > > > There are other userland screen readers and one supports
> > software speech
> > > > > > > > > can't
> > > > > > > > > > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > > > > > > > > > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > > > > > > > > > If we get more coders things might go faster, but until
> > then; you might
> > > > > > > > > need
> > > > > > > > > > to use another solution for accessability if you have no
> > serial ports.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for
> > speakup. I certinly
> > > > > > > > > don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so
> > please read on if
> > > > > > > > > you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial
> > ports on a
> > > > > > > > > PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some
> > earlier posts
> > > > > > > > > I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this
> > situation). As a
> > > > > > > > > result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the
> > other OS on such a
> > > > > > > > > machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting
> > tired of using
> > > > > > > > > the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux
> > compatible). I
> > > > > > > > > know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software
> > synth that would
> > > > > > > > > work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't
> > write anything for
> > > > > > > > > IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product.
> > However, as I stated
> > > > > > > > > earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to
> > use software
> > > > > > > > > speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know
> > that I could
> > > > > > > > > use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently
> > downloaded it
> > > > > > > > > and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given
> > a choice of
> > > > > > > > > access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus,
> > not writing a
> > > > > > > > > driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me
> > works without
> > > > > > > > > a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly
> > doesn't have to
> > > > > > > > > be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would
> > be nice to
> > > > > > > > > have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to
> > modify a dectalk
> > > > > > > > > or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've
> > taken c++ my
> > > > > > > > > junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science).
> > Even so, I
> > > > > > > > > have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs
> > work that come
> > > > > > > > > with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and
> > hopefully learn more.
> > > > > > > > > As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup
> > driver for
> > > > > > > > > viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind
> > switching to the
> > > > > > > > > opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've
> > wined enough.
> > > > > > > > > Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > > > > > > > > > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for
> > speakup for now at
> > > > > > > > > least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me,
> > please write so
> > > > > > > > > that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe
> > try to persaude
> > > > > > > > > Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > > > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Janina Sajka, Director
> > > Technology Research and Development
> > > Governmental Relations Group
> > > American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)
> > >
> > > Email: janina@afb.net Phone: (202) 408-8175
> > >
> > > Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper,
> > Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html
> > >
> > > Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin Luther King
> > Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
> > > http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp
> > >
> > > Learn how to make accessible software at
> > http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

My web site is http://www.mhonline.net/~chuckh 
The Moon is Waning Crescent (36% of Full)

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

If one wants to be able to use speakup at all on a system with no serial ports and no possibility for adding in a speech board, then that is a risk one will have to take ultimately.
Greg


On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 05:56:26PM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:
> You can only get the boot messages with dmesg if the system finishes 
> booting. If the boot process fails you are SOL!
> 
> On Wed, 16 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> 
> > This discussion is because I for one don't care about the boot messages as long as I'm able to get speech when the login prompt comes up. I can always view the boot messages with dmesg if I want.
> > Greg
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 09:47:22PM +0200, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> > > Guys, you all perfectly understand that there is no way to have Speakup use
> > > software synthesizer from the very start of the machine. So, why this
> > > discussion at all?
> > > Actually, I recall that superslim notebook computers, such as Sonny Viao,
> > > play a sound through their sound card at the very beginning of boot process.
> > > So, perhaps, theoretically it should be possible if all PC's could
> > > initialize the sound card in a similar way. But this is not so...
> > > Best,
> > > Victor
> > > 
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Janina Sajka" <janina@afb.net>
> > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 6:33 PM
> > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > I'll tell you why software speech is a big deal to me. I spend a lot of
> > > > time on the road. Because I work for a non-profit agency, I'm not
> > > > usually in First Class when I'm on the airplane. I'm frequently locked
> > > > into a hotel conference room with anywhere from 20 to 200 other people.
> > > > Sometimes I have a table to spread my computer out on. Often, I just
> > > > have my lap. For me, software speech means that I can use linux and
> > > > speakup with just a headphone--nothing else. Today, it's just a lot more
> > > > complicated because there's that additional device, and that cable that
> > > > attaches that additional device to the computer. So, today, when I don't
> > > > have table space, I run emacspeak with ViaVoice--but I'd sure like to
> > > > have the speakup option, too.
> > > >
> > > > PS: When I'm on the road, I don't usually care if speech starts at the
> > > > very beginning of the boot process. Mostly, I don't even boot, but
> > > > rather use the suspend/resume feature of my laptop which, by the way,
> > > > works pretty well with ViaVoice.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 16 May 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > ok now for my 20c worth.
> > > > > What the hell is the deal with having software speech or not? In a way I
> > > > > would prefer it when there is simply no other means of speech output
> > > but,
> > > > > it has it's limitations.
> > > > > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of
> > > system
> > > > > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> > > > > 2: Remember that if you do go down the path of software synthesys, you
> > > > > won't have  speech right from the get go when you first turn your
> > > machine
> > > > > on.
> > > > > That's all I wanna say at this point. I don't know much else about but
> > > > > thought I'd add my thoughts on the matter.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Shaun..
> > > > > "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
> > > > > EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> > > > > YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends
> > > on
> > > > > www.jong.com:6667
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 15 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Guess I'll stick with the other OS on that machine perhaps until 2010
> > > if need be (grin)
> > > > > > Greg
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:22:59PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > > > Not at this stage. Serial ports are necessary for us to get speech
> > > > > > > and none of the install systems I know of come up with parallel
> > > consoles or
> > > > > > > software speech. SUSE does do braille I hear though
> > > > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:04AM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > > Thanks for the interesting info on the blazer. So, it looks like a
> > > eyes-free install of Linux is not possible on a machine with no serial
> > > ports, right?
> > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:53:11PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the line
> > > printer.
> > > > > > > > > Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there are no
> > > flush codes.
> > > > > > > > > You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even then I
> > > don't know of anything
> > > > > > > > > other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs speakup
> > > does. The blaser
> > > > > > > > > has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I believe it
> > > supports
> > > > > > > > > indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser would also
> > > be rather bad
> > > > > > > > > since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done installs
> > > like that and
> > > > > > > > > it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps 3k of
> > > messages out a
> > > > > > > > > port.
> > > > > > > > > If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for installs.
> > > One disk error
> > > > > > > > > will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel, but do
> > > give it a try :-)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't release the
> > > numpad and the
> > > > > > > > > review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to
> > > completely release
> > > > > > > > > certain consoles including the number pad.
> > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > I thought we already had the ability to put speakup to sleep
> > > and to wake it
> > > > > > > > > > up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic ... I
> > > know there are
> > > > > > > > > > some of you out there that either have used or are still using
> > > emacspeak.
> > > > > > > > > > Any recommendations on where to start after the howto if I
> > > decide to take
> > > > > > > > > > that route until speakup gets software speech? Also, I was
> > > thinking of how
> > > > > > > > > > to install Linux on such a system without sited help. I've got
> > > a braille
> > > > > > > > > > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the
> > > blazer's parallel
> > > > > > > > > > port, and using the line printer console. However, when I
> > > include
> > > > > > > > > > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses,
> > > and I don't
> > > > > > > > > > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon.
> > > Any
> > > > > > > > > > suggestions? Thanks.
> > > > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > > > P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > > > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> > > > > > > > > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing that
> > > message
> > > > > > > > > > > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached
> > > below.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The fundermental problem with software speech and speakup is
> > > this:
> > > > > > > > > > > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot process,
> > > just after
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > console driver or at the same time. At this point; no sound
> > > is
> > > > > > > > > > initialized,
> > > > > > > > > > > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> > > > > > > > > > > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet be
> > > loaded.
> > > > > > > > > > > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the
> > > kernel isn't an
> > > > > > > > > > > option since it would make the kernel image too large and
> > > anything in
> > > > > > > > > > kernel
> > > > > > > > > > > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > > > > > > > > > > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > > > > > > > > > > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > It may be possible to do something like keep speakup asleep
> > > until viavoice
> > > > > > > > > > > is running, and make some shim between speakup and viavoice
> > > but this
> > > > > > > > > > > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take
> > > information
> > > > > > > > > > > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with speakup,
> > > hand it to
> > > > > > > > > > userspace
> > > > > > > > > > > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have
> > > that program
> > > > > > > > > > > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land sound
> > > drivers that
> > > > > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > > > presume you loaded. This is going to make the performance of
> > > the system
> > > > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > > > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods were
> > > made by
> > > > > > > > > > somebody
> > > > > > > > > > > in the forseeable future, there are many more moving parts
> > > to make work.
> > > > > > > > > > > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound
> > > drivers unload,
> > > > > > > > > > how
> > > > > > > > > > > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the kernel
> > > to tell user
> > > > > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > > > > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > > > > > > > > > > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> > > > > > > > > > > to interact with its talking device and assumes that sound
> > > and viavoice
> > > > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > > > in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak
> > > respawns it.
> > > > > > > > > > > What you are asking is for speakup to become re-enterant,
> > > the ability to
> > > > > > > > > > put it
> > > > > > > > > > > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk to
> > > it from user
> > > > > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > > > > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel code
> > > talk back to
> > > > > > > > > > > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > > > > > > > > > > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving
> > > away all his
> > > > > > > > > > > money and becoming a hermit.
> > > > > > > > > > > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice tomorrow
> > > and coded flat
> > > > > > > > > > out
> > > > > > > > > > > until the project was complete it would require months of
> > > coding time
> > > > > > > > > > before
> > > > > > > > > > > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > > > > > > > > > > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and
> > > although they hook
> > > > > > > > > > into
> > > > > > > > > > > the windows subsystems they are applications like any other.
> > > Speakup is in
> > > > > > > > > > > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > > > > > > > > > > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech? Often
> > > you are left
> > > > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > > > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is unrestartable.
> > > If we were to
> > > > > > > > > > > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the
> > > kernel becoming
> > > > > > > > > > > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > > > > > > > > > > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use emacspeak,
> > > preferably
> > > > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > > > > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and shell
> > > mode.
> > > > > > > > > > > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does emacspeak.
> > > Once you have
> > > > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start
> > > writing the code
> > > > > > > > > > > for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing
> > > coders <smile>
> > > > > > > > > > > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you, it
> > > will tide you
> > > > > > > > > > over
> > > > > > > > > > > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > > > > > > > > > > There are other userland screen readers and one supports
> > > software speech
> > > > > > > > > > can't
> > > > > > > > > > > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > > > > > > > > > > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > > > > > > > > > > If we get more coders things might go faster, but until
> > > then; you might
> > > > > > > > > > need
> > > > > > > > > > > to use another solution for accessability if you have no
> > > serial ports.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for
> > > speakup. I certinly
> > > > > > > > > > don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so
> > > please read on if
> > > > > > > > > > you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial
> > > ports on a
> > > > > > > > > > PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some
> > > earlier posts
> > > > > > > > > > I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this
> > > situation). As a
> > > > > > > > > > result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the
> > > other OS on such a
> > > > > > > > > > machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting
> > > tired of using
> > > > > > > > > > the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux
> > > compatible). I
> > > > > > > > > > know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software
> > > synth that would
> > > > > > > > > > work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't
> > > write anything for
> > > > > > > > > > IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product.
> > > However, as I stated
> > > > > > > > > > earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to
> > > use software
> > > > > > > > > > speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know
> > > that I could
> > > > > > > > > > use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently
> > > downloaded it
> > > > > > > > > > and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given
> > > a choice of
> > > > > > > > > > access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus,
> > > not writing a
> > > > > > > > > > driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me
> > > works without
> > > > > > > > > > a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly
> > > doesn't have to
> > > > > > > > > > be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would
> > > be nice to
> > > > > > > > > > have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to
> > > modify a dectalk
> > > > > > > > > > or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've
> > > taken c++ my
> > > > > > > > > > junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science).
> > > Even so, I
> > > > > > > > > > have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs
> > > work that come
> > > > > > > > > > with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and
> > > hopefully learn more.
> > > > > > > > > > As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup
> > > driver for
> > > > > > > > > > viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind
> > > switching to the
> > > > > > > > > > opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've
> > > wined enough.
> > > > > > > > > > Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > > > > > > > > > > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for
> > > speakup for now at
> > > > > > > > > > least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me,
> > > please write so
> > > > > > > > > > that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe
> > > try to persaude
> > > > > > > > > > Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > 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
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Janina Sajka, Director
> > > > Technology Research and Development
> > > > Governmental Relations Group
> > > > American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)
> > > >
> > > > Email: janina@afb.net Phone: (202) 408-8175
> > > >
> > > > Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper,
> > > Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html
> > > >
> > > > Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin Luther King
> > > Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
> > > > http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp
> > > >
> > > > Learn how to make accessible software at
> > > http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > 
> 
> My web site is http://www.mhonline.net/~chuckh 
> The Moon is Waning Crescent (36% of Full)
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: software speech for speakup

[Scott Howell]

Oh, dear God, someone wash that man's mouth out. Great! my dog poops
greater things than Windows any version.


On Mon, 14 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:

> Can't do that since I got the barebones system a year ago before I ever dreamed of using Linux as opposed to the simetimes unstable but still great Ms Windows 98 SE OS.
> Greg

Re: software speech for speakup

[Scott Howell]

Kirk, your correct that usb is the suposed future, but I suspect it'll be
some time before the serial port goes the way of the isa slot and even its
hanging on even if barely. I do agree that if a usb keyboard can be
detected, then so could a synth. What is sad is that most folks are going
with the software speech which at this point is very disappointing in my
mind. Oh, and yes there are at least one pci and one usb synth on the
market. Bet Ryser never got a Tripple Talk to muck with yet.
> 
> Hate to say this, but the attitude is what sets back accesibility in the
> first place. Yes, I would suggest avoiding this if buying new equipment
> and you have a serial synth. But this is the future. The fact is that a
> serial port is a resource hog. Perhaps preasure should instead be put on
> manufactures to offer other access means such as PCI and USB synths.
> 
> Before anyone starts on USB, it is very possible to detect some hardware
> on the port before init starts. Keyboards and mice are both capable of
> support in BIOS. There is no reason another device couldn't piggyback the
> same means.
> 
> =======
> Kirk Wood
> Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> 
> Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

Maybe I should clarify ... I was talking in the past tens, not the present.
Greg


----- Original Message -----
From: Scott Howell <showell@lrxms.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 7:05 PM
Subject: Re: software speech for speakup


> Oh, dear God, someone wash that man's mouth out. Great! my dog poops
> greater things than Windows any version.
>
>
> On Mon, 14 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
>
> > Can't do that since I got the barebones system a year ago before I ever
dreamed of using Linux as opposed to the simetimes unstable but still great
Ms Windows 98 SE OS.
> > Greg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

Uhmmm, software speech is free, and usb synths cost some cash.
Greg


----- Original Message -----
From: Scott Howell <showell@lrxms.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: software speech for speakup


>
> Kirk, your correct that usb is the suposed future, but I suspect it'll be
> some time before the serial port goes the way of the isa slot and even its
> hanging on even if barely. I do agree that if a usb keyboard can be
> detected, then so could a synth. What is sad is that most folks are going
> with the software speech which at this point is very disappointing in my
> mind. Oh, and yes there are at least one pci and one usb synth on the
> market. Bet Ryser never got a Tripple Talk to muck with yet.
> >
> > Hate to say this, but the attitude is what sets back accesibility in the
> > first place. Yes, I would suggest avoiding this if buying new equipment
> > and you have a serial synth. But this is the future. The fact is that a
> > serial port is a resource hog. Perhaps preasure should instead be put on
> > manufactures to offer other access means such as PCI and USB synths.
> >
> > Before anyone starts on USB, it is very possible to detect some hardware
> > on the port before init starts. Keyboards and mice are both capable of
> > support in BIOS. There is no reason another device couldn't piggyback
the
> > same means.
> >
> > =======
> > Kirk Wood
> > Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> >
> > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Wood]

On Wed, 16 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> If one wants to be able to use speakup at all on a system with no
> serial ports and no possibility for adding in a speech board, then
> that is a risk one will have to take ultimately.

While this is far from ideal, this isn't as bad as it may first
sound. Consider that most people don't know a thing about the boot process
anyway. And that in the evil empire's os, this is always the case.

The nice day will be when a hardware device that plugs into the VGA port
can do the screen reading. Then everything will be usable without
limitations that OS reliant methods subject.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Wood]

It will be some time before serial ports are unavailable. It could be a
very long time given the amount of installed hardware. Periferals ahve a
way of hanging on long after the main unit gets replaced. The difference
with ISA is that about the only thing not so ancient most people would
have for the ISA slot is a modem. 

Right now it is mostly machines designed for the corperate world that are
dumping the serial port. And for the situation, it is perhaps a good
idea. If a person doesn't have a use for the serial port, then there is
just no good business reason to buy it. Just this week I recomended we
stop buying machines with serial for some places.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Wood]

On Wed, 16 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> Uhmmm, software speech is free, and usb synths cost some cash.

This is quite true. And there is some validity to the situation. Just
remember that everything comes with a toll. The trade off is that software
speach takes clock cycles, and probably won't initialize as reliably. Not
that the trade off isn't worth it. I think it would be a worthy trade in
many cases. Just always remember that everything to do with a computer
involves a trade off.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

That isn't true for a computer only, it's true practically for everything in this world.
Greg


On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 08:52:33PM -0500, Kirk Wood wrote:
> On Wed, 16 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > Uhmmm, software speech is free, and usb synths cost some cash.
> 
> This is quite true. And there is some validity to the situation. Just
> remember that everything comes with a toll. The trade off is that software
> speach takes clock cycles, and probably won't initialize as reliably. Not
> that the trade off isn't worth it. I think it would be a worthy trade in
> many cases. Just always remember that everything to do with a computer
> involves a trade off.
> 
> =======
> Kirk Wood
> Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> 
> Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: software speech for speakup

[Shaun Oliver]

janina. 
You make a valid point. In the case of people using laptops, software
synthesys would be an excellent idea.
I'm just not convinced that' it's a good idea myself. I know I seemed a
bit ters but it appears from where I sit that a good deal of debate has
taken place with regards to software speech..
But I'll conceed that in the case where there's no space to spread speech
synthesiser, laptop and what all else, it has it's benifits.


Shaun..
"Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Wed, 16 May 2001, Janina Sajka wrote:

> I'll tell you why software speech is a big deal to me. I spend a lot of
> time on the road. Because I work for a non-profit agency, I'm not
> usually in First Class when I'm on the airplane. I'm frequently locked
> into a hotel conference room with anywhere from 20 to 200 other people.
> Sometimes I have a table to spread my computer out on. Often, I just
> have my lap. For me, software speech means that I can use linux and
> speakup with just a headphone--nothing else. Today, it's just a lot more
> complicated because there's that additional device, and that cable that
> attaches that additional device to the computer. So, today, when I don't
> have table space, I run emacspeak with ViaVoice--but I'd sure like to
> have the speakup option, too.
> 
> PS: When I'm on the road, I don't usually care if speech starts at the
> very beginning of the boot process. Mostly, I don't even boot, but
> rather use the suspend/resume feature of my laptop which, by the way,
> works pretty well with ViaVoice.
> 
> On Wed, 16 May 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> 
> > ok now for my 20c worth.
> > What the hell is the deal with having software speech or not? In a way I
> > would prefer it when there is simply no other means of speech output but,
> > it has it's limitations.
> > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of system
> > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> > 2: Remember that if you do go down the path of software synthesys, you
> > won't have  speech right from the get go when you first turn your machine
> > on.
> > That's all I wanna say at this point. I don't know much else about but
> > thought I'd add my thoughts on the matter.
> >
> >
> > Shaun..
> > "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
> > EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> > YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
> > www.jong.com:6667
> >
> > On Tue, 15 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> >
> > > Guess I'll stick with the other OS on that machine perhaps until 2010 if need be (grin)
> > > Greg
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:22:59PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > Not at this stage. Serial ports are necessary for us to get speech
> > > > and none of the install systems I know of come up with parallel consoles or
> > > > software speech. SUSE does do braille I hear though
> > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:04AM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > Thanks for the interesting info on the blazer. So, it looks like a eyes-free install of Linux is not possible on a machine with no serial ports, right?
> > > > > Greg
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:53:11PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > > Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the line printer.
> > > > > > Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there are no flush codes.
> > > > > > You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even then I don't know of anything
> > > > > > other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs speakup does. The blaser
> > > > > > has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I believe it supports
> > > > > > indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser would also be rather bad
> > > > > > since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done installs like that and
> > > > > > it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps 3k of messages out a
> > > > > > port.
> > > > > > If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for installs. One disk error
> > > > > > will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel, but do give it a try :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't release the numpad and the
> > > > > > review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to completely release
> > > > > > certain consoles including the number pad.
> > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > I thought we already had the ability to put speakup to sleep and to wake it
> > > > > > > up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic ... I know there are
> > > > > > > some of you out there that either have used or are still using emacspeak.
> > > > > > > Any recommendations on where to start after the howto if I decide to take
> > > > > > > that route until speakup gets software speech? Also, I was thinking of how
> > > > > > > to install Linux on such a system without sited help. I've got a braille
> > > > > > > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the blazer's parallel
> > > > > > > port, and using the line printer console. However, when I include
> > > > > > > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses, and I don't
> > > > > > > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon. Any
> > > > > > > suggestions? Thanks.
> > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> > > > > > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing that message
> > > > > > > > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached below.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The fundermental problem with software speech and speakup is this:
> > > > > > > > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot process, just after
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > console driver or at the same time. At this point; no sound is
> > > > > > > initialized,
> > > > > > > > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> > > > > > > > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet be loaded.
> > > > > > > > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the kernel isn't an
> > > > > > > > option since it would make the kernel image too large and anything in
> > > > > > > kernel
> > > > > > > > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > > > > > > > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > > > > > > > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It may be possible to do something like keep speakup asleep until viavoice
> > > > > > > > is running, and make some shim between speakup and viavoice but this
> > > > > > > > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take information
> > > > > > > > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with speakup, hand it to
> > > > > > > userspace
> > > > > > > > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have that program
> > > > > > > > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land sound drivers that
> > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > presume you loaded. This is going to make the performance of the system
> > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods were made by
> > > > > > > somebody
> > > > > > > > in the forseeable future, there are many more moving parts to make work.
> > > > > > > > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound drivers unload,
> > > > > > > how
> > > > > > > > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the kernel to tell user
> > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > > > > > > > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> > > > > > > > to interact with its talking device and assumes that sound and viavoice
> > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak respawns it.
> > > > > > > > What you are asking is for speakup to become re-enterant, the ability to
> > > > > > > put it
> > > > > > > > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk to it from user
> > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel code talk back to
> > > > > > > > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > > > > > > > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving away all his
> > > > > > > > money and becoming a hermit.
> > > > > > > > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice tomorrow and coded flat
> > > > > > > out
> > > > > > > > until the project was complete it would require months of coding time
> > > > > > > before
> > > > > > > > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > > > > > > > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and although they hook
> > > > > > > into
> > > > > > > > the windows subsystems they are applications like any other. Speakup is in
> > > > > > > > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > > > > > > > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech? Often you are left
> > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is unrestartable. If we were to
> > > > > > > > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the kernel becoming
> > > > > > > > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > > > > > > > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use emacspeak, preferably
> > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and shell mode.
> > > > > > > > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does emacspeak. Once you have
> > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start writing the code
> > > > > > > > for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing coders <smile>
> > > > > > > > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you, it will tide you
> > > > > > > over
> > > > > > > > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > > > > > > > There are other userland screen readers and one supports software speech
> > > > > > > can't
> > > > > > > > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > > > > > > > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > > > > > > > If we get more coders things might go faster, but until then; you might
> > > > > > > need
> > > > > > > > to use another solution for accessability if you have no serial ports.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for speakup. I certinly
> > > > > > > don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so please read on if
> > > > > > > you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial ports on a
> > > > > > > PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some earlier posts
> > > > > > > I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this situation). As a
> > > > > > > result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the other OS on such a
> > > > > > > machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting tired of using
> > > > > > > the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux compatible). I
> > > > > > > know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software synth that would
> > > > > > > work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't write anything for
> > > > > > > IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product. However, as I stated
> > > > > > > earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to use software
> > > > > > > speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know that I could
> > > > > > > use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently downloaded it
> > > > > > > and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given a choice of
> > > > > > > access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus, not writing a
> > > > > > > driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me works without
> > > > > > > a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly doesn't have to
> > > > > > > be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would be nice to
> > > > > > > have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to modify a dectalk
> > > > > > > or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've taken c++ my
> > > > > > > junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science). Even so, I
> > > > > > > have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs work that come
> > > > > > > with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and hopefully learn more.
> > > > > > > As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup driver for
> > > > > > > viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind switching to the
> > > > > > > opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've wined enough.
> > > > > > > Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > > > > > > > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for speakup for now at
> > > > > > > least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me, please write so
> > > > > > > that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe try to persaude
> > > > > > > Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > --
> > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> -- 
> 
> 				Janina Sajka, Director
> 				Technology Research and Development
> 				Governmental Relations Group
> 				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)
> 
> Email: janina@afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175
> 
> Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper, Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html
> 
> Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin Luther King Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
> http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp
> 
> Learn how to make accessible software at http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: software speech for speakup

[Charles Hallenbeck]

Shaun expressed my own feelings also. If I were using a laptop I would
really appreciate anything that simplified the clutter. But given a
choice, I would prefer the HW solution. 
Chuck


On Thu, 17 May 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:

> janina. 
> You make a valid point. In the case of people using laptops, software
> synthesys would be an excellent idea.
> I'm just not convinced that' it's a good idea myself. I know I seemed a
> bit ters but it appears from where I sit that a good deal of debate has
> taken place with regards to software speech..
> But I'll conceed that in the case where there's no space to spread speech
> synthesiser, laptop and what all else, it has it's benifits.

My web site is http://www.mhonline.net/~chuckh 
The Moon is Waning Crescent (31% of Full)

Re: software speech for speakup

[Brian Borowski]

The discussion about software speech synthesis has got to the point that I
must comment on it.  This is an open source project (speakup), and people
are actually getting to the point where the requests for it are more like
users demanding that Kirk better do something about this, or else...

I suggest to those users, that they might consider doing the unmentioned
or else, (whatever that might be), or perhaps making some code
contributions (heaven-forbid) to the project.  It's not that the project
isn't somewhat demand-driven by users, but it's also directed and guided
by those who must do the appropriate research, learning, and write the
code to make things happen.  If some of the energy that has gone into
generating loud complaints, were instead directed into the necessary
activities of serious commitment and creativity, we might instead have
some basic operational software speech synthesis for speakup.

There is a price you pay for open source, and that is, you either get what
you get, notwithstanding the fact that the process can be guided by
feedback from users, or you make some contribution by writing code...

Brian Borowski



On Wed, 16 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:

> Thanks Janina, there is finally someone else here that knows exactly what I'm talking about.
> Greg
>
>
> On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 12:33:01PM -0400, Janina Sajka wrote:
> > I'll tell you why software speech is a big deal to me. I spend a lot of
> > time on the road. Because I work for a non-profit agency, I'm not
> > usually in First Class when I'm on the airplane. I'm frequently locked
> > into a hotel conference room with anywhere from 20 to 200 other people.
> > Sometimes I have a table to spread my computer out on. Often, I just
> > have my lap. For me, software speech means that I can use linux and
> > speakup with just a headphone--nothing else. Today, it's just a lot more
> > complicated because there's that additional device, and that cable that
> > attaches that additional device to the computer. So, today, when I don't
> > have table space, I run emacspeak with ViaVoice--but I'd sure like to
> > have the speakup option, too.
> >
> > PS: When I'm on the road, I don't usually care if speech starts at the
> > very beginning of the boot process. Mostly, I don't even boot, but
> > rather use the suspend/resume feature of my laptop which, by the way,
> > works pretty well with ViaVoice.
> >
> > On Wed, 16 May 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> >
> > > ok now for my 20c worth.
> > > What the hell is the deal with having software speech or not? In a way I
> > > would prefer it when there is simply no other means of speech output but,
> > > it has it's limitations.
> > > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of system
> > > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> > > 2: Remember that if you do go down the path of software synthesys, you
> > > won't have  speech right from the get go when you first turn your machine
> > > on.
> > > That's all I wanna say at this point. I don't know much else about but
> > > thought I'd add my thoughts on the matter.
> > >
> > >
> > > Shaun..
> > > "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
> > > EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> > > YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
> > > www.jong.com:6667
> > >
> > > On Tue, 15 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > >
> > > > Guess I'll stick with the other OS on that machine perhaps until 2010 if need be (grin)
> > > > Greg
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:22:59PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > Not at this stage. Serial ports are necessary for us to get speech
> > > > > and none of the install systems I know of come up with parallel consoles or
> > > > > software speech. SUSE does do braille I hear though
> > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:04AM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > Thanks for the interesting info on the blazer. So, it looks like a eyes-free install of Linux is not possible on a machine with no serial ports, right?
> > > > > > Greg
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:53:11PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > > > Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the line printer.
> > > > > > > Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there are no flush codes.
> > > > > > > You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even then I don't know of anything
> > > > > > > other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs speakup does. The blaser
> > > > > > > has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I believe it supports
> > > > > > > indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser would also be rather bad
> > > > > > > since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done installs like that and
> > > > > > > it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps 3k of messages out a
> > > > > > > port.
> > > > > > > If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for installs. One disk error
> > > > > > > will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel, but do give it a try :-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't release the numpad and the
> > > > > > > review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to completely release
> > > > > > > certain consoles including the number pad.
> > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > > I thought we already had the ability to put speakup to sleep and to wake it
> > > > > > > > up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic ... I know there are
> > > > > > > > some of you out there that either have used or are still using emacspeak.
> > > > > > > > Any recommendations on where to start after the howto if I decide to take
> > > > > > > > that route until speakup gets software speech? Also, I was thinking of how
> > > > > > > > to install Linux on such a system without sited help. I've got a braille
> > > > > > > > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the blazer's parallel
> > > > > > > > port, and using the line printer console. However, when I include
> > > > > > > > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel oopses, and I don't
> > > > > > > > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after logon. Any
> > > > > > > > suggestions? Thanks.
> > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> > > > > > > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing that message
> > > > > > > > > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached below.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The fundermental problem with software speech and speakup is this:
> > > > > > > > > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot process, just after
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > console driver or at the same time. At this point; no sound is
> > > > > > > > initialized,
> > > > > > > > > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file systems
> > > > > > > > > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet be loaded.
> > > > > > > > > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the kernel isn't an
> > > > > > > > > option since it would make the kernel image too large and anything in
> > > > > > > > kernel
> > > > > > > > > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > > > > > > > > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > > > > > > > > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It may be possible to do something like keep speakup asleep until viavoice
> > > > > > > > > is running, and make some shim between speakup and viavoice but this
> > > > > > > > > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take information
> > > > > > > > > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with speakup, hand it to
> > > > > > > > userspace
> > > > > > > > > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have that program
> > > > > > > > > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land sound drivers that
> > > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > presume you loaded. This is going to make the performance of the system
> > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods were made by
> > > > > > > > somebody
> > > > > > > > > in the forseeable future, there are many more moving parts to make work.
> > > > > > > > > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound drivers unload,
> > > > > > > > how
> > > > > > > > > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the kernel to tell user
> > > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > > > > > > > > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech server
> > > > > > > > > to interact with its talking device and assumes that sound and viavoice
> > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak respawns it.
> > > > > > > > > What you are asking is for speakup to become re-enterant, the ability to
> > > > > > > > put it
> > > > > > > > > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk to it from user
> > > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel code talk back to
> > > > > > > > > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > > > > > > > > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving away all his
> > > > > > > > > money and becoming a hermit.
> > > > > > > > > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice tomorrow and coded flat
> > > > > > > > out
> > > > > > > > > until the project was complete it would require months of coding time
> > > > > > > > before
> > > > > > > > > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > > > > > > > > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and although they hook
> > > > > > > > into
> > > > > > > > > the windows subsystems they are applications like any other. Speakup is in
> > > > > > > > > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > > > > > > > > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech? Often you are left
> > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is unrestartable. If we were to
> > > > > > > > > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the kernel becoming
> > > > > > > > > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > > > > > > > > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use emacspeak, preferably
> > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and shell mode.
> > > > > > > > > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does emacspeak. Once you have
> > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start writing the code
> > > > > > > > > for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing coders <smile>
> > > > > > > > > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you, it will tide you
> > > > > > > > over
> > > > > > > > > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > > > > > > > > There are other userland screen readers and one supports software speech
> > > > > > > > can't
> > > > > > > > > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > > > > > > > > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > > > > > > > > If we get more coders things might go faster, but until then; you might
> > > > > > > > need
> > > > > > > > > to use another solution for accessability if you have no serial ports.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for speakup. I certinly
> > > > > > > > don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so please read on if
> > > > > > > > you're interested. There are some of us that don't have serial ports on a
> > > > > > > > PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on some earlier posts
> > > > > > > > I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this situation). As a
> > > > > > > > result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the other OS on such a
> > > > > > > > machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm getting tired of using
> > > > > > > > the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux compatible). I
> > > > > > > > know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software synth that would
> > > > > > > > work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't write anything for
> > > > > > > > IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product. However, as I stated
> > > > > > > > earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able to use software
> > > > > > > > speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I know that I could
> > > > > > > > use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've recently downloaded it
> > > > > > > > and played with it for two days (even read  the howto). Given a choice of
> > > > > > > > access though, I would much rather stick with speakup. Thus, not writing a
> > > > > > > > driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far for me works without
> > > > > > > > a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup certinly doesn't have to
> > > > > > > > be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it would be nice to
> > > > > > > > have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to modify a dectalk
> > > > > > > > or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine. I've taken c++ my
> > > > > > > > junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer science). Even so, I
> > > > > > > > have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample programs work that come
> > > > > > > > with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and hopefully learn more.
> > > > > > > > As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup driver for
> > > > > > > > viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't mind switching to the
> > > > > > > > opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok, I've wined enough.
> > > > > > > > Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > > > > > > > > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for speakup for now at
> > > > > > > > least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me, please write so
> > > > > > > > that we could see how many more takers there are, and maybe try to persaude
> > > > > > > > Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > 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
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > --
> > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >
> >
> > --
> >
> > 				Janina Sajka, Director
> > 				Technology Research and Development
> > 				Governmental Relations Group
> > 				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)
> >
> > Email: janina@afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175
> >
> > Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper, Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html
> >
> > Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin Luther King Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
> > http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp
> >
> > Learn how to make accessible software at http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: software speech for speakup

[Shaun Oliver]

Well, an interesting point my man.
I agree that windows2000 has a far from perfect speech accessable
interface. What can I say? It's done using the microstuffed agent
character merlin and the sam engine of the ms tts engine. man my mIRC
client uses the learnout&hauspie true voice tts and I think it shits all
over the microstuffed tts engine. but that's getting off the track.
As for your point about sysadmins wanting to do the remote thing I will
also conceed that software speech would be a great workaround. if I knew a
little more about programming than I currently do, I'd have a go at it
myself. Who knows? I'd probably make a good go of it.


Shaun..
"Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Thu, 17 May 2001, Kirk Wood wrote:

> Software speech can have a lot of other benefits aside from a laptop. I
> know of at least two people who might be interested in working as a
> network administrator. The problem is that sometimes you have to work from
> a console and will need speech. Plugging in a synth when needed isn't
> feasible, nor is leaving one connected all the time.
> 
> Software speech is quite feasible. It isn't a perfect solution and few
> have played it as such. It will one day be a good work around. This is why
> macroslop has chosen to include rudimentary speech in winblows 2000. They
> don't want to compete with the established market of screen readers
> (yet). But they do want to give basic control to anyone. It is far from
> perfect. But it is there.
> 
> Another thing that this offers is a chance to benefit from increasing the
> market for speech synthasis. Some people are using some built in tool to
> have a document read to them. Kind of the you hear a mistake better then
> your eyes see it thing. Software speech is the only way this is cost
> effective. But it could expand the market and help drive down the cost of
> a hardware synth in time. If nothing else, consider that within a few
> years computers with the power for software speech will cost less and be
> as small as the hardware synths of today. So who knows, perhaps the future
> will be a "hardware" synth running linux. If that doesn't give pause, I
> don't know what will.
> 
> =======
> Kirk Wood
> Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> 
> Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Wood]

Software speech can have a lot of other benefits aside from a laptop. I
know of at least two people who might be interested in working as a
network administrator. The problem is that sometimes you have to work from
a console and will need speech. Plugging in a synth when needed isn't
feasible, nor is leaving one connected all the time.

Software speech is quite feasible. It isn't a perfect solution and few
have played it as such. It will one day be a good work around. This is why
macroslop has chosen to include rudimentary speech in winblows 2000. They
don't want to compete with the established market of screen readers
(yet). But they do want to give basic control to anyone. It is far from
perfect. But it is there.

Another thing that this offers is a chance to benefit from increasing the
market for speech synthasis. Some people are using some built in tool to
have a document read to them. Kind of the you hear a mistake better then
your eyes see it thing. Software speech is the only way this is cost
effective. But it could expand the market and help drive down the cost of
a hardware synth in time. If nothing else, consider that within a few
years computers with the power for software speech will cost less and be
as small as the hardware synths of today. So who knows, perhaps the future
will be a "hardware" synth running linux. If that doesn't give pause, I
don't know what will.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Charles Hallenbeck]

This discussion is improving as it proceeds, I think!

One more factor to consider is the desirability of offloading peripheral
tasks to peripheral processors so that the central processor(s) do not
have to service absolutely everything that happens inside the
cabinet. Input-Output tasks are ideal candidates for offloading from the
CPU. That is done in IDE devices, in video cards, in real modems (as
opposed to Win modems), in keystroke processing inside the keyboard,
etcetera. Software speech synthesis is a fairly heavy duty processing
load, and if it can be handed off to an 80186 or whatever, that is very
good news for the CPU.

Chuck


My web site is http://www.mhonline.net/~chuckh 
The Moon is Waning Crescent (30% of Full)

Re: software speech for speakup

[Shaun Oliver]

well, bugger it! I agree chuck.

Shaun..
"Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Thu, 17 May 2001, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:

> This discussion is improving as it proceeds, I think!
> 
> One more factor to consider is the desirability of offloading peripheral
> tasks to peripheral processors so that the central processor(s) do not
> have to service absolutely everything that happens inside the
> cabinet. Input-Output tasks are ideal candidates for offloading from the
> CPU. That is done in IDE devices, in video cards, in real modems (as
> opposed to Win modems), in keystroke processing inside the keyboard,
> etcetera. Software speech synthesis is a fairly heavy duty processing
> load, and if it can be handed off to an 80186 or whatever, that is very
> good news for the CPU.
> 
> Chuck
> 
> 
> My web site is http://www.mhonline.net/~chuckh 
> The Moon is Waning Crescent (30% of Full)
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: software speech for speakup

[Victor Tsaran]

Emacspeak with Viavoice in that case will serve you very well.
Vic

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gregory Nowak" <romualt@megsinet.net>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 11:52 PM
Subject: Re: software speech for speakup


> This discussion is because I for one don't care about the boot messages as
long as I'm able to get speech when the login prompt comes up. I can always
view the boot messages with dmesg if I want.
> Greg
>
>
> On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 09:47:22PM +0200, Victor Tsaran wrote:
> > Guys, you all perfectly understand that there is no way to have Speakup
use
> > software synthesizer from the very start of the machine. So, why this
> > discussion at all?
> > Actually, I recall that superslim notebook computers, such as Sonny
Viao,
> > play a sound through their sound card at the very beginning of boot
process.
> > So, perhaps, theoretically it should be possible if all PC's could
> > initialize the sound card in a similar way. But this is not so...
> > Best,
> > Victor
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Janina Sajka" <janina@afb.net>
> > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 6:33 PM
> > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> >
> >
> > > I'll tell you why software speech is a big deal to me. I spend a lot
of
> > > time on the road. Because I work for a non-profit agency, I'm not
> > > usually in First Class when I'm on the airplane. I'm frequently locked
> > > into a hotel conference room with anywhere from 20 to 200 other
people.
> > > Sometimes I have a table to spread my computer out on. Often, I just
> > > have my lap. For me, software speech means that I can use linux and
> > > speakup with just a headphone--nothing else. Today, it's just a lot
more
> > > complicated because there's that additional device, and that cable
that
> > > attaches that additional device to the computer. So, today, when I
don't
> > > have table space, I run emacspeak with ViaVoice--but I'd sure like to
> > > have the speakup option, too.
> > >
> > > PS: When I'm on the road, I don't usually care if speech starts at the
> > > very beginning of the boot process. Mostly, I don't even boot, but
> > > rather use the suspend/resume feature of my laptop which, by the way,
> > > works pretty well with ViaVoice.
> > >
> > > On Wed, 16 May 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> > >
> > > > ok now for my 20c worth.
> > > > What the hell is the deal with having software speech or not? In a
way I
> > > > would prefer it when there is simply no other means of speech output
> > but,
> > > > it has it's limitations.
> > > > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of
> > system
> > > > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a
sb-live.
> > > > 2: Remember that if you do go down the path of software synthesys,
you
> > > > won't have  speech right from the get go when you first turn your
> > machine
> > > > on.
> > > > That's all I wanna say at this point. I don't know much else about
but
> > > > thought I'd add my thoughts on the matter.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Shaun..
> > > > "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
> > > > EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> > > > YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on
#aussiefriends
> > on
> > > > www.jong.com:6667
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 15 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Guess I'll stick with the other OS on that machine perhaps until
2010
> > if need be (grin)
> > > > > Greg
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:22:59PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > > Not at this stage. Serial ports are necessary for us to get
speech
> > > > > > and none of the install systems I know of come up with parallel
> > consoles or
> > > > > > software speech. SUSE does do braille I hear though
> > > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:04AM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > > > Thanks for the interesting info on the blazer. So, it looks
like a
> > eyes-free install of Linux is not possible on a machine with no serial
> > ports, right?
> > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:53:11PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > > > > > > > Unless it is a 2.4.x kernel it can't do console on the line
> > printer.
> > > > > > > > Even if it does; it won't make the blaser talk; there are no
> > flush codes.
> > > > > > > > You need to put the blaser on a serial port and even then I
> > don't know of anything
> > > > > > > > other than emacspeak that supports the bns unless cvs
speakup
> > does. The blaser
> > > > > > > > has old implementations of the bns speech code, but I
believe it
> > supports
> > > > > > > > indexing. Doing an install of Linux with the blaser would
also
> > be rather bad
> > > > > > > > since you have no way to shut up the speech, I've done
installs
> > like that and
> > > > > > > > it gets old real quick especially when the kernel dumps 3k
of
> > messages out a
> > > > > > > > port.
> > > > > > > > If you can't shut it up somehow you don't want it for
installs.
> > One disk error
> > > > > > > > will win you half an hour of speech you can't cancel, but do
> > give it a try :-)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regarding shutting up speakup insert enter doesn't release
the
> > numpad and the
> > > > > > > > review keys remain active. I was talking of a method to
> > completely release
> > > > > > > > certain consoles including the number pad.
> > > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 11:29:36PM -0500, Gregory Nowak
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I thought we already had the ability to put speakup to
sleep
> > and to wake it
> > > > > > > > > up with ins+numpad-enter. Also, not to get off topic ... I
> > know there are
> > > > > > > > > some of you out there that either have used or are still
using
> > emacspeak.
> > > > > > > > > Any recommendations on where to start after the howto if I
> > decide to take
> > > > > > > > > that route until speakup gets software speech? Also, I was
> > thinking of how
> > > > > > > > > to install Linux on such a system without sited help. I've
got
> > a braille
> > > > > > > > > blazer here. I thought of setting up speech through the
> > blazer's parallel
> > > > > > > > > port, and using the line printer console. However, when I
> > include
> > > > > > > > > "console=lp0" on the loadlin command line, the kernel
oopses,
> > and I don't
> > > > > > > > > know of how to activate the console on /dev/lp0 after
logon.
> > Any
> > > > > > > > > suggestions? Thanks.
> > > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > > P.S. The kernel *doesn't* oops if I leave that option out.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > > From: "Kerry Hoath" <kerry@gotss.eu.org>
> > > > > > > > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> > > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 10:57 PM
> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Ok so that was all 1 big long line! I won't be slicing
that
> > message
> > > > > > > > > > down into smaller sections in ed os it remains attached
> > below.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The fundermental problem with software speech and
speakup is
> > this:
> > > > > > > > > > speakup gets control extremely early on in the boot
process,
> > just after
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > console driver or at the same time. At this point; no
sound
> > is
> > > > > > > > > initialized,
> > > > > > > > > > no hard disks are known, ho usb is active, no file
systems
> > > > > > > > > > are mounted and therefore sound and viavoice can't yet
be
> > loaded.
> > > > > > > > > > Via voice is a huge application, and putting it into the
> > kernel isn't an
> > > > > > > > > > option since it would make the kernel image too large
and
> > anything in
> > > > > > > > > kernel
> > > > > > > > > > image is unswappable and consumes memory.
> > > > > > > > > > Not to mention we don't have the viavoice source so we
> > > > > > > > > > can't even integrate it if we wanted to.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > It may be possible to do something like keep speakup
asleep
> > until viavoice
> > > > > > > > > > is running, and make some shim between speakup and
viavoice
> > but this
> > > > > > > > > > is not trivial. What you are trying to do is take
> > information
> > > > > > > > > > from kernel space (console driver) handle it with
speakup,
> > hand it to
> > > > > > > > > userspace
> > > > > > > > > > to a program that mightn't even be running anymore, have
> > that program
> > > > > > > > > > synthesize the speech and pass it back to kernel land
sound
> > drivers that
> > > > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > > presume you loaded. This is going to make the
performance of
> > the system
> > > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > > cyphoning honey uphill. Even assuming the speakup mods
were
> > made by
> > > > > > > > > somebody
> > > > > > > > > > in the forseeable future, there are many more moving
parts
> > to make work.
> > > > > > > > > > What if one of the tasks such as viavoice dies or sound
> > drivers unload,
> > > > > > > > > how
> > > > > > > > > > do we tell the kernel to tell user space to tell the
kernel
> > to tell user
> > > > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > > > that something ahs gone wrong?
> > > > > > > > > > Emacspeak is a user application. It calls a speech
server
> > > > > > > > > > to interact with its talking device and assumes that
sound
> > and viavoice
> > > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > > in top shape. When the speech server crashes emacspeak
> > respawns it.
> > > > > > > > > > What you are asking is for speakup to become
re-enterant,
> > the ability to
> > > > > > > > > put it
> > > > > > > > > > to sleep and wake it up at will and the ability to talk
to
> > it from user
> > > > > > > > > space
> > > > > > > > > > despite the fact it is kernel code and have that kernel
code
> > talk back to
> > > > > > > > > > user space. This requires a complete redesign of speakup
> > > > > > > > > > and although it may be possible, so is Bill Gates giving
> > away all his
> > > > > > > > > > money and becoming a hermit.
> > > > > > > > > > Even if Kirk changed his mind regarding viavoice
tomorrow
> > and coded flat
> > > > > > > > > out
> > > > > > > > > > until the project was complete it would require months
of
> > coding time
> > > > > > > > > before
> > > > > > > > > > the whole system was usable if indeed it could be done.
> > > > > > > > > > Remember Windows screen readers run in user land and
> > although they hook
> > > > > > > > > into
> > > > > > > > > > the windows subsystems they are applications like any
other.
> > Speakup is in
> > > > > > > > > > the kernel itself and is part of the operating system.
> > > > > > > > > > Ever had jfw or windoweyes crash and lost your speech?
Often
> > you are left
> > > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > > no clue as to why it happend and often jfw is
unrestartable.
> > If we were to
> > > > > > > > > > have this happen in Linux it may result in bits of the
> > kernel becoming
> > > > > > > > > > unusable and could lead to an entire system crash.
> > > > > > > > > > My personal recommendation is to learn how to use
emacspeak,
> > preferably
> > > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > > > a seasoned emacs user and learn about term mode and
shell
> > mode.
> > > > > > > > > > W3 is a nice browser, vm works well and so does
emacspeak.
> > Once you have
> > > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > down pat, you can then use the c-mode in emacs to start
> > writing the code
> > > > > > > > > > for speakup and take some of the weight off the existing
> > coders <smile>
> > > > > > > > > > If it takes you a week to get emacspeak working for you,
it
> > will tide you
> > > > > > > > > over
> > > > > > > > > > until tuxtalk is ready for prime time.
> > > > > > > > > > There are other userland screen readers and one supports
> > software speech
> > > > > > > > > can't
> > > > > > > > > > remember what it is called. Use that until the massive
> > > > > > > > > > modifications are in speakup itself around 2010.
> > > > > > > > > > If we get more coders things might go faster, but until
> > then; you might
> > > > > > > > > need
> > > > > > > > > > to use another solution for accessability if you have no
> > serial ports.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:13:40PM -0500, Gregory Nowak
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Ok, here is my penny's worth on software speech for
> > speakup. I certinly
> > > > > > > > > don't mean to flame or unconstructively critisize here, so
> > please read on if
> > > > > > > > > you're interested. There are some of us that don't have
serial
> > ports on a
> > > > > > > > > PC, but do have a sound card supported in Linux (based on
some
> > earlier posts
> > > > > > > > > I've seen on this list, I know I'm not alone in this
> > situation). As a
> > > > > > > > > result, I would personally like to entirely blow away the
> > other OS on such a
> > > > > > > > > machine, and dedicate it to Linux (simply because I'm
getting
> > tired of using
> > > > > > > > > the other OS on it, and because all its hardware is Linux
> > compatible). I
> > > > > > > > > know that Kirk mentioned that he was working on a software
> > synth that would
> > > > > > > > > work with speakup in the far future, and that he wouldn't
> > write anything for
> > > > > > > > > IBM viavoice, because it wasn't an opensource product.
> > However, as I stated
> > > > > > > > > earlier, there are thoes of us that would like to be able
to
> > use software
> > > > > > > > > speech with speakup in the very soon future (now). Yes, I
know
> > that I could
> > > > > > > > > use emacspeak which supports viavoice. However, I've
recently
> > downloaded it
> > > > > > > > > and played with it for two days (even read  the howto).
Given
> > a choice of
> > > > > > > > > access though, I would much rather stick with speakup.
Thus,
> > not writing a
> > > > > > > > > driver for a product that is not opensource (and so far
for me
> > works without
> > > > > > > > > a hitch) is a serious limitation to access. Speakup
certinly
> > doesn't have to
> > > > > > > > > be distributted with viavoice (emacspeak isn't), but it
would
> > be nice to
> > > > > > > > > have the option of using it. It shouldn't be that hard to
> > modify a dectalk
> > > > > > > > > or doubletalk PC driver to work with the speech engine.
I've
> > taken c++ my
> > > > > > > > > junior and senior years of high scghool (AP computer
science).
> > Even so, I
> > > > > > > > > have somewhat of an understanding on how the sample
programs
> > work that come
> > > > > > > > > with the engine. I also plan to read the API docs, and
> > hopefully learn more.
> > > > > > > > > As you can see, I'm not a candidate to write the speakup
> > driver for
> > > > > > > > > viavoice, so I'm not volenteering. I certinly wouldn't
mind
> > switching to the
> > > > > > > > > opensource engine when it became usable. However ... ok,
I've
> > wined enough.
> > > > > > > > > Kirk, I guess I'm sim
> > > > > > > > > > ng your mind regarding viavoice as a speech engine for
> > speakup for now at
> > > > > > > > > least. If there is anyone else here that agrees with me,
> > please write so
> > > > > > > > > that we could see how many more takers there are, and
maybe
> > try to persaude
> > > > > > > > > Kirk some more to change his mind. Thanks for reading.
> > > > > > > > > > > Greg
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > > > > > > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or
kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > > > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > > > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Janina Sajka, Director
> > > Technology Research and Development
> > > Governmental Relations Group
> > > American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)
> > >
> > > Email: janina@afb.net Phone: (202) 408-8175
> > >
> > > Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper,
> > Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html
> > >
> > > Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin Luther
King
> > Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
> > > http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp
> > >
> > > Learn how to make accessible software at
> > http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: software speech for speakup

[Janina Sajka]

Charles:

Agreed that the system must boot in order to read the logs or execute
dmesg. But, I return to my primary use scenario for software speech, a
portable system for use, on the road, with no added hardware hanging off
the serial port--I think you'd agree that I would likely resolve the
booting issue before I tried to run with a portable on my lap?


-- 

				Janina Sajka, Director
				Technology Research and Development
				Governmental Relations Group
				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)

Email: janina@afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175

Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper, Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html

Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin Luther King Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp

Learn how to make accessible software at http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html

Re: software speech for speakup

[Charles Hallenbeck]

For sure! I would gladly forego those boot messages to keep down the
clutter.


On Thu, 17 May 2001, Janina Sajka wrote:

> Charles:
> 
> Agreed that the system must boot in order to read the logs or execute
> dmesg. But, I return to my primary use scenario for software speech, a
> portable system for use, on the road, with no added hardware hanging off
> the serial port--I think you'd agree that I would likely resolve the
> booting issue before I tried to run with a portable on my lap?
> 
> 
> 

Visit me at http://www.mhonline.net/~chuckh 
The Moon is Waning Crescent (28% of Full)

Re: software speech for speakup

[Janina Sajka]

Well, among other problems, usb still means a second hardware device
connected by a cable. As I pointed out earlier, this is cumbersome for
the way I need to use portable computers. Not that the world needs to
conform to me, of course, but I know I'm not alone in this requirement.
If you compute on the go, you want to keep the hardware setup
simple--one device. Period. Emacspeak and ViaVoice gives me just that.

On Wed, 16 May 2001, Scott Howell wrote:

>
> Kirk, your correct that usb is the suposed future, but I suspect it'll be
> some time before the serial port goes the way of the isa slot and even its
> hanging on even if barely. I do agree that if a usb keyboard can be
> detected, then so could a synth. What is sad is that most folks are going
> with the software speech which at this point is very disappointing in my
> mind. Oh, and yes there are at least one pci and one usb synth on the
> market. Bet Ryser never got a Tripple Talk to muck with yet.
> >
> > Hate to say this, but the attitude is what sets back accesibility in the
> > first place. Yes, I would suggest avoiding this if buying new equipment
> > and you have a serial synth. But this is the future. The fact is that a
> > serial port is a resource hog. Perhaps preasure should instead be put on
> > manufactures to offer other access means such as PCI and USB synths.
> >
> > Before anyone starts on USB, it is very possible to detect some hardware
> > on the port before init starts. Keyboards and mice are both capable of
> > support in BIOS. There is no reason another device couldn't piggyback the
> > same means.
> >
> > =======
> > Kirk Wood
> > Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> >
> > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>

-- 

				Janina Sajka, Director
				Technology Research and Development
				Governmental Relations Group
				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)

Email: janina@afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175

Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper, Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html

Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin Luther King Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp

Learn how to make accessible software at http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html

Re: software speech for speakup

[Janina Sajka]

Absolutely agree. I never use software speech at my desk--or in my hotel
room, for that matter. It's not the ideal by any means. It just meets
certain needs very effectively. So, I have never seen this as an
either/or situation. Rather, a major segment of functionality is missing
from speakup. I say this knowing the fundamental issues involved in
putting software speech into speakup--but that doesn't change the fact
that a major use segment is missing.

On Thu, 17 May 2001, Charles Hallenbeck wrote:

> Shaun expressed my own feelings also. If I were using a laptop I would
> really appreciate anything that simplified the clutter. But given a
> choice, I would prefer the HW solution.
> Chuck
>
>
> On Thu, 17 May 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
>
> > janina.
> > You make a valid point. In the case of people using laptops, software
> > synthesys would be an excellent idea.
> > I'm just not convinced that' it's a good idea myself. I know I seemed a
> > bit ters but it appears from where I sit that a good deal of debate has
> > taken place with regards to software speech..
> > But I'll conceed that in the case where there's no space to spread speech
> > synthesiser, laptop and what all else, it has it's benifits.
>
> My web site is http://www.mhonline.net/~chuckh
> The Moon is Waning Crescent (31% of Full)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

-- 

				Janina Sajka, Director
				Technology Research and Development
				Governmental Relations Group
				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)

Email: janina@afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175

Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper, Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html

Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin Luther King Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp

Learn how to make accessible software at http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Wood]

Actually though the USB offers a chance to make a hardware synth that
would be no more intrusive then a set of headphones. Already the bigest thing
about most synths is packaging and the speaker. And I would hope that you
would be looking to use headphones while on a flight.

All the same, software synth is a good idea and would serve many people
well.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Janina Sajka]

Well, I suppose I could velcros it to the lid. And, I would do that if
the dimensions work out well. In fact, I was hoping the TripleTalk USB
would let me do exactly that--but Mike seems to have a burr up his ***
about open source drivers. Grrr.

Guess I'll just have to wait for someone to make a killer PCMCIA card
that supports Speakup. Or software speech ...


On Thu, 17 May 2001, Kirk Wood wrote:

> Actually though the USB offers a chance to make a hardware synth that
> would be no more intrusive then a set of headphones. Already the bigest thing
> about most synths is packaging and the speaker. And I would hope that you
> would be looking to use headphones while on a flight.
>
> All the same, software synth is a good idea and would serve many people
> well.
>
> =======
> Kirk Wood
> Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
>
> Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

-- 

				Janina Sajka, Director
				Technology Research and Development
				Governmental Relations Group
				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)

Email: janina@afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175

Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper, Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html

Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin Luther King Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp

Learn how to make accessible software at http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Wood]

The whole thing is that a synth could be built on a single chip fitting
into the modular plug that is typically found on a USB cable. Or, it could
be placed in small box along with volume controls. The catch would be to
forego the power (and space) hungry speaker.

The PCMCIA synth sounds like a great idea also. In fact, my mind jumps to
enabling said device (and drivers) such that speech is started when it is
inserted. Then you can later shut down the speech output and remove the
device. Both of these technologies support hot swap. I don't have much
experiance with them in Linux, but in Windows a program can be launched on
insert. I would think Linux could support such as well.

If the technology was there, preasure could be exerted to make the server
room accessible to the blind.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Shaun Oliver]

Janina makes an interesting point here.
Why not make a pcmcia speech synthesiser? I suppose there's always the
problem of only having 1 such slot on a laptop but if you aren't going to
use it for modem or networking who cares?


Shaun..
"Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Thu, 17 May 2001, Janina Sajka wrote:

> Well, I suppose I could velcros it to the lid. And, I would do that if
> the dimensions work out well. In fact, I was hoping the TripleTalk USB
> would let me do exactly that--but Mike seems to have a burr up his ***
> about open source drivers. Grrr.
> 
> Guess I'll just have to wait for someone to make a killer PCMCIA card
> that supports Speakup. Or software speech ...
> 
> 
> On Thu, 17 May 2001, Kirk Wood wrote:
> 
> > Actually though the USB offers a chance to make a hardware synth that
> > would be no more intrusive then a set of headphones. Already the bigest thing
> > about most synths is packaging and the speaker. And I would hope that you
> > would be looking to use headphones while on a flight.
> >
> > All the same, software synth is a good idea and would serve many people
> > well.
> >
> > =======
> > Kirk Wood
> > Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> >
> > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >
> 
> -- 
> 
> 				Janina Sajka, Director
> 				Technology Research and Development
> 				Governmental Relations Group
> 				American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)
> 
> Email: janina@afb.net		Phone: (202) 408-8175
> 
> Will electronic books surpass print books? Read our white paper, Surpassing Gutenberg, at http://www.afb.org/ebook.html
> 
> Download a free sample Digital Talking Book edition of Martin Luther King Jr's inspiring "I Have A Dream" speech at
> http://www.afb.org/mlkweb.asp
> 
> Learn how to make accessible software at http://www.afb.org/technology/accessapp.html
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kerry Hoath]

Software speech is not free, you pay for eloquence under Windows
unless you mean microsoft text to speech and I hope nobody in their right mind
uses that as their primary engine :-)
There are also lisencing restrictions for viavoice under Linux, that is what
tuxtalk is for a free alternative to the lisenced comercial offerings.
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 08:09:37PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> Uhmmm, software speech is free, and usb synths cost some cash.
> Greg
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Scott Howell <showell@lrxms.net>
> To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 7:13 PM
> Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> 
> 
> >
> > Kirk, your correct that usb is the suposed future, but I suspect it'll be
> > some time before the serial port goes the way of the isa slot and even its
> > hanging on even if barely. I do agree that if a usb keyboard can be
> > detected, then so could a synth. What is sad is that most folks are going
> > with the software speech which at this point is very disappointing in my
> > mind. Oh, and yes there are at least one pci and one usb synth on the
> > market. Bet Ryser never got a Tripple Talk to muck with yet.
> > >
> > > Hate to say this, but the attitude is what sets back accesibility in the
> > > first place. Yes, I would suggest avoiding this if buying new equipment
> > > and you have a serial synth. But this is the future. The fact is that a
> > > serial port is a resource hog. Perhaps preasure should instead be put on
> > > manufactures to offer other access means such as PCI and USB synths.
> > >
> > > Before anyone starts on USB, it is very possible to detect some hardware
> > > on the port before init starts. Keyboards and mice are both capable of
> > > support in BIOS. There is no reason another device couldn't piggyback
> the
> > > same means.
> > >
> > > =======
> > > Kirk Wood
> > > Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> > >
> > > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

-- 
--
Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
ICQ UIN: 8226547

RE: software speech for speakup

[Stephen Dawes]

As a laptop user, I to like the idea of a PCMCIA card, but think that Kirk's
idea of a synth that fits into a USB module might be more practical and
flexible.  I don't know of a way of connecting a PCMCIA device to a desk
top, but know that current laptops support USB.  This would allow for
someone to use the same device in more then one settings.  At home on their
desktop, and with their laptop when travelling, or, just to put in their
pocket to use both at work and home on desktops.

Kirk, what kind of speech could you expect out of such a one chip does all
approach?  Secondly, correct me if I am wrong here, but can you not draw
your power from the USB port, and thus eliminating the need for the balky
power sources that currently drive speech synths?



Stephen Dawes B.A. B.Sc.
Web Business Office, The City of Calgary
PHONE:  (403) 268-5527. FAX: (403) 268-6423
E-MAIL ADDRESS:  sdawes@gov.calgary.ab.ca




> -----Original Message-----
> From: speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca
> [mailto:speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca]On Behalf Of Kirk Wood
> Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 4:54 PM
> To: speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
>
>
> The whole thing is that a synth could be built on a single chip fitting
> into the modular plug that is typically found on a USB cable. Or, it could
> be placed in small box along with volume controls. The catch would be to
> forego the power (and space) hungry speaker.
>
> The PCMCIA synth sounds like a great idea also. In fact, my mind jumps to
> enabling said device (and drivers) such that speech is started when it is
> inserted. Then you can later shut down the speech output and remove the
> device. Both of these technologies support hot swap. I don't have much
> experiance with them in Linux, but in Windows a program can be launched on
> insert. I would think Linux could support such as well.
>
> If the technology was there, preasure could be exerted to make the server
> room accessible to the blind.
>
> =======
> Kirk Wood
> Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
>
> Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

Yes, but there is a limit to how much power the usb port can supply to a device. 
The more devices connect, the less power each gets if it isn't self-powered. Although, people don't usually use more then two devices at a time unless they have a hub of course.
Greg


On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 07:58:29AM -0600, Stephen Dawes wrote:
> As a laptop user, I to like the idea of a PCMCIA card, but think that Kirk's
> idea of a synth that fits into a USB module might be more practical and
> flexible.  I don't know of a way of connecting a PCMCIA device to a desk
> top, but know that current laptops support USB.  This would allow for
> someone to use the same device in more then one settings.  At home on their
> desktop, and with their laptop when travelling, or, just to put in their
> pocket to use both at work and home on desktops.
> 
> Kirk, what kind of speech could you expect out of such a one chip does all
> approach?  Secondly, correct me if I am wrong here, but can you not draw
> your power from the USB port, and thus eliminating the need for the balky
> power sources that currently drive speech synths?
> 
> 
> 
> Stephen Dawes B.A. B.Sc.
> Web Business Office, The City of Calgary
> PHONE:  (403) 268-5527. FAX: (403) 268-6423
> E-MAIL ADDRESS:  sdawes@gov.calgary.ab.ca
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca
> > [mailto:speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca]On Behalf Of Kirk Wood
> > Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 4:54 PM
> > To: speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> >
> >
> > The whole thing is that a synth could be built on a single chip fitting
> > into the modular plug that is typically found on a USB cable. Or, it could
> > be placed in small box along with volume controls. The catch would be to
> > forego the power (and space) hungry speaker.
> >
> > The PCMCIA synth sounds like a great idea also. In fact, my mind jumps to
> > enabling said device (and drivers) such that speech is started when it is
> > inserted. Then you can later shut down the speech output and remove the
> > device. Both of these technologies support hot swap. I don't have much
> > experiance with them in Linux, but in Windows a program can be launched on
> > insert. I would think Linux could support such as well.
> >
> > If the technology was there, preasure could be exerted to make the server
> > room accessible to the blind.
> >
> > =======
> > Kirk Wood
> > Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> >
> > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Wood]

Well actually, the double talk right now as shipped takes a total of three
chips. One of these chips is for interfacing to either a serial or an ISA
slot. One holds the processor and one holds the data. All other devices on
the board are support for them.

All of this could easily fit in one of today's chips leaving room for
additional code and leaving more clock cycles then the processor a double
talk uses (8086). Now of course code would have to be developed. But I
would expect that a single chip solution could give double talk or better
and recieve flash upgrades. The chips are already on the market. You can
buy a 50 mips chip with on board flash rom for less then $20. The code for
direct connection to USB is given. It really isn't like it would be a huge
hardware project. It would mostly be a software (firmware) project.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Wood]

On Fri, 18 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> Yes, but there is a limit to how much power the usb port can supply to a device. 
> The more devices connect, the less power each gets if it isn't self-powered. Although, people don't usually use more then two devices at a time unless they have a hub of course.

Actually power is the big obsticle. But the needed power for a set of
headphones would not be great. Just understnad that if you want a speaker
you triple the size and power requirements. Audio output is the main power
consumption. And in a portable situation you would only be looking for the
single USB device anyway.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

RE: software speech for speakup

[Janina Sajka]

On Fri, 18 May 2001, Stephen Dawes wrote:

snip snip

> I don't know of a way of connecting a PCMCIA device to a desk
> top,

There are pci and isa cards that provide pcmcia sockets. I have one around
here somewhere. Admitedly, not the ideal for the desktop.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kerry Hoath]

USB is good for 500MA at 5 volts for power. That's enough to run
a doubletalk or the tripple talk.

Regards, Kerry.
On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 10:24:36AM -0500, Kirk Wood wrote:
> On Fri, 18 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > Yes, but there is a limit to how much power the usb port can supply to a device. 
> > The more devices connect, the less power each gets if it isn't self-powered. Although, people don't usually use more then two devices at a time unless they have a hub of course.
> 
> Actually power is the big obsticle. But the needed power for a set of
> headphones would not be great. Just understnad that if you want a speaker
> you triple the size and power requirements. Audio output is the main power
> consumption. And in a portable situation you would only be looking for the
> single USB device anyway.
> 
> =======
> Kirk Wood
> Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> 
> Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

-- 
--
Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
ICQ UIN: 8226547

RE: software speech for speakup

[Shaun Oliver]

yes you can draw power from a usb port but it's limmited. I'm not sure as
to how much you can draw out of it but I know it's not much.
and Bare in mind that usb only has a running speed of 12 megabits. But
that shouldn't bother you too much if you're going to use it for speech.

Shaun..
"Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Fri, 18 May 2001, Stephen Dawes wrote:

> As a laptop user, I to like the idea of a PCMCIA card, but think that Kirk's
> idea of a synth that fits into a USB module might be more practical and
> flexible.  I don't know of a way of connecting a PCMCIA device to a desk
> top, but know that current laptops support USB.  This would allow for
> someone to use the same device in more then one settings.  At home on their
> desktop, and with their laptop when travelling, or, just to put in their
> pocket to use both at work and home on desktops.
> 
> Kirk, what kind of speech could you expect out of such a one chip does all
> approach?  Secondly, correct me if I am wrong here, but can you not draw
> your power from the USB port, and thus eliminating the need for the balky
> power sources that currently drive speech synths?
> 
> 
> 
> Stephen Dawes B.A. B.Sc.
> Web Business Office, The City of Calgary
> PHONE:  (403) 268-5527. FAX: (403) 268-6423
> E-MAIL ADDRESS:  sdawes@gov.calgary.ab.ca
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca
> > [mailto:speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca]On Behalf Of Kirk Wood
> > Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 4:54 PM
> > To: speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> >
> >
> > The whole thing is that a synth could be built on a single chip fitting
> > into the modular plug that is typically found on a USB cable. Or, it could
> > be placed in small box along with volume controls. The catch would be to
> > forego the power (and space) hungry speaker.
> >
> > The PCMCIA synth sounds like a great idea also. In fact, my mind jumps to
> > enabling said device (and drivers) such that speech is started when it is
> > inserted. Then you can later shut down the speech output and remove the
> > device. Both of these technologies support hot swap. I don't have much
> > experiance with them in Linux, but in Windows a program can be launched on
> > insert. I would think Linux could support such as well.
> >
> > If the technology was there, preasure could be exerted to make the server
> > room accessible to the blind.
> >
> > =======
> > Kirk Wood
> > Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> >
> > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: software speech for speakup

[Shaun Oliver]

thanks for that information. maybe someone should give rc systems a gentle
boot in the bum and suggest such a device


Shaun..
"Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Sat, 19 May 2001, Kerry Hoath wrote:

> USB is good for 500MA at 5 volts for power. That's enough to run
> a doubletalk or the tripple talk.
> 
> Regards, Kerry.
> On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 10:24:36AM -0500, Kirk Wood wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > Yes, but there is a limit to how much power the usb port can supply to a device. 
> > > The more devices connect, the less power each gets if it isn't self-powered. Although, people don't usually use more then two devices at a time unless they have a hub of course.
> > 
> > Actually power is the big obsticle. But the needed power for a set of
> > headphones would not be great. Just understnad that if you want a speaker
> > you triple the size and power requirements. Audio output is the main power
> > consumption. And in a portable situation you would only be looking for the
> > single USB device anyway.
> > 
> > =======
> > Kirk Wood
> > Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> > 
> > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > 
> 
> -- 
> --
> Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> ICQ UIN: 8226547
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kerry Hoath]

It allready exists it is called the Tripple talk.
Kirk doesn't yet have one to play with so he can't write a driver for
it.
On Sat, May 19, 2001 at 04:20:03PM +1000, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> thanks for that information. maybe someone should give rc systems a gentle
> boot in the bum and suggest such a device
> 
> 
> Shaun..
> "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
> EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
> www.jong.com:6667
> 
> On Sat, 19 May 2001, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> 
> > USB is good for 500MA at 5 volts for power. That's enough to run
> > a doubletalk or the tripple talk.
> > 
> > Regards, Kerry.
> > On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 10:24:36AM -0500, Kirk Wood wrote:
> > > On Fri, 18 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > Yes, but there is a limit to how much power the usb port can supply to a device. 
> > > > The more devices connect, the less power each gets if it isn't self-powered. Although, people don't usually use more then two devices at a time unless they have a hub of course.
> > > 
> > > Actually power is the big obsticle. But the needed power for a set of
> > > headphones would not be great. Just understnad that if you want a speaker
> > > you triple the size and power requirements. Audio output is the main power
> > > consumption. And in a portable situation you would only be looking for the
> > > single USB device anyway.
> > > 
> > > =======
> > > Kirk Wood
> > > Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> > > 
> > > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Speakup mailing list
> > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > --
> > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 

-- 
--
Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
ICQ UIN: 8226547

Re: software speech for speakup

[Victor Tsaran]

Hi, Kerry!
What is Tuxtalk? Where can I get this software?
Best,
Vic

Kerry Hoath writes:
 > Software speech is not free, you pay for eloquence under Windows
 > unless you mean microsoft text to speech and I hope nobody in their right mind
 > uses that as their primary engine :-)
 > There are also lisencing restrictions for viavoice under Linux, that is what
 > tuxtalk is for a free alternative to the lisenced comercial offerings.
 > On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 08:09:37PM -0500, Gregory Nowak wrote:
 > > Uhmmm, software speech is free, and usb synths cost some cash.
 > > Greg
 > > 
 > > 
 > > ----- Original Message -----
 > > From: Scott Howell <showell@lrxms.net>
 > > To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
 > > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 7:13 PM
 > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
 > > 
 > > 
 > > >
 > > > Kirk, your correct that usb is the suposed future, but I suspect it'll be
 > > > some time before the serial port goes the way of the isa slot and even its
 > > > hanging on even if barely. I do agree that if a usb keyboard can be
 > > > detected, then so could a synth. What is sad is that most folks are going
 > > > with the software speech which at this point is very disappointing in my
 > > > mind. Oh, and yes there are at least one pci and one usb synth on the
 > > > market. Bet Ryser never got a Tripple Talk to muck with yet.
 > > > >
 > > > > Hate to say this, but the attitude is what sets back accesibility in the
 > > > > first place. Yes, I would suggest avoiding this if buying new equipment
 > > > > and you have a serial synth. But this is the future. The fact is that a
 > > > > serial port is a resource hog. Perhaps preasure should instead be put on
 > > > > manufactures to offer other access means such as PCI and USB synths.
 > > > >
 > > > > Before anyone starts on USB, it is very possible to detect some hardware
 > > > > on the port before init starts. Keyboards and mice are both capable of
 > > > > support in BIOS. There is no reason another device couldn't piggyback
 > > the
 > > > > same means.
 > > > >
 > > > > =======
 > > > > Kirk Wood
 > > > > Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
 > > > >
 > > > > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
 > > > >
 > > > >
 > > > > _______________________________________________
 > > > > 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
 > > >
 > > 
 > > 
 > > _______________________________________________
 > > Speakup mailing list
 > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
 > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
 > > 
 > 
 > -- 
 > --
 > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
 > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
 > ICQ UIN: 8226547
 > 
 > 
 > _______________________________________________
 > Speakup mailing list
 > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
 > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

12 mbps is theoratical. I think that 10 Mbps is the reality, if even that.
Greg


On Sat, May 19, 2001 at 01:37:41PM +1000, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> yes you can draw power from a usb port but it's limmited. I'm not sure as
> to how much you can draw out of it but I know it's not much.
> and Bare in mind that usb only has a running speed of 12 megabits. But
> that shouldn't bother you too much if you're going to use it for speech.
> 
> Shaun..
> "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
> EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
> www.jong.com:6667
> 
> On Fri, 18 May 2001, Stephen Dawes wrote:
> 
> > As a laptop user, I to like the idea of a PCMCIA card, but think that Kirk's
> > idea of a synth that fits into a USB module might be more practical and
> > flexible.  I don't know of a way of connecting a PCMCIA device to a desk
> > top, but know that current laptops support USB.  This would allow for
> > someone to use the same device in more then one settings.  At home on their
> > desktop, and with their laptop when travelling, or, just to put in their
> > pocket to use both at work and home on desktops.
> > 
> > Kirk, what kind of speech could you expect out of such a one chip does all
> > approach?  Secondly, correct me if I am wrong here, but can you not draw
> > your power from the USB port, and thus eliminating the need for the balky
> > power sources that currently drive speech synths?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Stephen Dawes B.A. B.Sc.
> > Web Business Office, The City of Calgary
> > PHONE:  (403) 268-5527. FAX: (403) 268-6423
> > E-MAIL ADDRESS:  sdawes@gov.calgary.ab.ca
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca
> > > [mailto:speakup-admin@braille.uwo.ca]On Behalf Of Kirk Wood
> > > Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 4:54 PM
> > > To: speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > Subject: Re: software speech for speakup
> > >
> > >
> > > The whole thing is that a synth could be built on a single chip fitting
> > > into the modular plug that is typically found on a USB cable. Or, it could
> > > be placed in small box along with volume controls. The catch would be to
> > > forego the power (and space) hungry speaker.
> > >
> > > The PCMCIA synth sounds like a great idea also. In fact, my mind jumps to
> > > enabling said device (and drivers) such that speech is started when it is
> > > inserted. Then you can later shut down the speech output and remove the
> > > device. Both of these technologies support hot swap. I don't have much
> > > experiance with them in Linux, but in Windows a program can be launched on
> > > insert. I would think Linux could support such as well.
> > >
> > > If the technology was there, preasure could be exerted to make the server
> > > room accessible to the blind.
> > >
> > > =======
> > > Kirk Wood
> > > Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> > >
> > > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

Just thinking ahead toward better days ...
how much are they currently, and where do you order one from?
Greg


On Sat, May 19, 2001 at 08:29:32PM +1000, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> It allready exists it is called the Tripple talk.
> Kirk doesn't yet have one to play with so he can't write a driver for
> it.
> On Sat, May 19, 2001 at 04:20:03PM +1000, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> > thanks for that information. maybe someone should give rc systems a gentle
> > boot in the bum and suggest such a device
> > 
> > 
> > Shaun..
> > "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
> > EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> > YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
> > www.jong.com:6667
> > 
> > On Sat, 19 May 2001, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> > 
> > > USB is good for 500MA at 5 volts for power. That's enough to run
> > > a doubletalk or the tripple talk.
> > > 
> > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 10:24:36AM -0500, Kirk Wood wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 18 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > Yes, but there is a limit to how much power the usb port can supply to a device. 
> > > > > The more devices connect, the less power each gets if it isn't self-powered. Although, people don't usually use more then two devices at a time unless they have a hub of course.
> > > > 
> > > > Actually power is the big obsticle. But the needed power for a set of
> > > > headphones would not be great. Just understnad that if you want a speaker
> > > > you triple the size and power requirements. Audio output is the main power
> > > > consumption. And in a portable situation you would only be looking for the
> > > > single USB device anyway.
> > > > 
> > > > =======
> > > > Kirk Wood
> > > > Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> > > > 
> > > > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > --
> > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> > 
> 
> -- 
> --
> Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> ICQ UIN: 8226547
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: software speech for speakup

[Janina Sajka]

Not quite, unless they've a product out but haven't bothered to update
their webpage at http://www.axsol.com.

The website is still promissing a usb TripleTalk for "later this year," as
it has been for over a year.

On Sat, 19 May 2001, Kerry Hoath wrote:

> It allready exists it is called the Tripple talk.
> Kirk doesn't yet have one to play with so he can't write a driver for
> it.
> On Sat, May 19, 2001 at 04:20:03PM +1000, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> > thanks for that information. maybe someone should give rc systems a gentle
> > boot in the bum and suggest such a device
> >
> >
> > Shaun..
> > "Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
> > EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> > YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
> > www.jong.com:6667
> >
> > On Sat, 19 May 2001, Kerry Hoath wrote:
> >
> > > USB is good for 500MA at 5 volts for power. That's enough to run
> > > a doubletalk or the tripple talk.
> > >
> > > Regards, Kerry.
> > > On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 10:24:36AM -0500, Kirk Wood wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 18 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > > > > Yes, but there is a limit to how much power the usb port can supply to a device.
> > > > > The more devices connect, the less power each gets if it isn't self-powered. Although, people don't usually use more then two devices at a time unless they have a hub of course.
> > > >
> > > > Actually power is the big obsticle. But the needed power for a set of
> > > > headphones would not be great. Just understnad that if you want a speaker
> > > > you triple the size and power requirements. Audio output is the main power
> > > > consumption. And in a portable situation you would only be looking for the
> > > > single USB device anyway.
> > > >
> > > > =======
> > > > Kirk Wood
> > > > Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> > > >
> > > > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Speakup mailing list
> > > > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > --
> > > Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> > > alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> > > ICQ UIN: 8226547
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Wood]

On Sat, 19 May 2001, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> 12 mbps is theoratical. I think that 10 Mbps is the reality, if even that.

I am trying to imagine how fast the speech would have to be cranked to
exceed this.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Geoff Shang]

Hi:

Having no speaker is not that big a deal - you could always run a line from
the device to the laptop's line-in jack and use the laptop's speakers.

Geoff.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Geoff Shang]

Hi:

There are PCMCIA synths already.  IIRC, there is a keynote gold PCMCIA.
There is definitely a dolphin one (Apollo?), I've seen it.  And I think
there's an accent as well I think.

Geoff.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Geoff Shang]

Hi:

For me, a major factor in hardware speech is the cost.  It seems to me that
a killing could be made by making a hardware linux-based speech synth,
especially if it sounded real good.  Imagine festival in a box.  Seriously
though, most speech hardware has been around for awhile and it's not
getting any cheaper.   Software speech came along at a good time and stole
the market.  A good, cheap, hardware device would definitely find a place
IMHO.

Geoff.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Matthew Campbell]

Geoff Shang wrote:

> There are PCMCIA synths already.  IIRC, there is a keynote gold PCMCIA.

Yes, it's the Keynote Gold Voice Card.  The problem with the Keynote
Gold synthesizers is that developers have to sign a non-disclosure
agreement to get technical documentation so that they can develop
drivers.  So I doubt that we'll see a Keynote driver for Speakup any
time soon.

-- 
Matt Campbell <http://www.pobox.com/~mattcampbell/>

RE: software speech for speakup

[Geoff Shang]

Hi:

IMHO, getting sound at boot time is not the major problem, though it is at
present with ALSA (but I'm sure something could be done about that).  The
problem is getting at the module so itt could be loaded off a file system
... if the synth were a module.  What if it were small enough to fit in the
kernel itself?  Wacky idea, but it may end up small enough.  At present,
rsynth is pretty small (though it does use 4 dynamically linked libs so
it's hard to tell how big its actual size is).

Geoff.

RE: software speech for speakup

[Geoff Shang]

On Wed, 16 May 2001, Janina Sajka wrote:

> It seems that we need to remember that all of those lovely messages,
> including the ones that pop up even before Speakup--and yes, there are a
> few that pop up before speakup--all of these are in the logs.

Not on my system at least.  OK, so there are a couple before the speakup
probing messages, but they still get spoken, even if after the fact.

Geoff.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Geoff Shang]

On Wed, 16 May 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:

> 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of system
> resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.

Or some other poliphonic soundcard.  Or if you run ESD.

> 2: Remember that if you do go down the path of software synthesys, you
> won't have  speech right from the get go when you first turn your machine
> on.

AFAIK, no-one has that.  Speakup provides speech from when the kernel
loads.

Geoff.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Wood]

> 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of system
> resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.

Geoff pointed out that you can get a card with multiple streams. There are
a number able to do this. But there are other considerations.

First, *most* of the people asking for this are looking at a particular
situation. They want the portibility and are well aware there are tradeoffs. 
(There are always tradeoffs.) Yes, it takes away clock cycles. But if you
are in a cramped spot and have no room for a synth, the clock cycle is
worth it.

Second, you can always add another sound card if it only handles one
stream. Last time I looked, I could buy a sound card for as little as
$5. And many have modules available. Even a $35 card is cheaper then any
hardware synth.

Pointing out the problems with software speech is pointless. Most of those
posting with the desire to see this are aware there are problems. They
already know that this will take time. And also, don't asume they are
somehow less understanding of the advantages of a hardware synth. In my
not so humble opinion making computing more affordable is a reasonable end
in itself. Software speech can drop the cost of this by almost a
grand. We are not talking chump change. The lowest cost hardware synth I
know of is over $200. If $200 is chump change to any list members please
let me know. I will personally put forth the time to get a
"scholarship" program started for synths helping out those who don't have
that kind of money burning.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Shaun Oliver]

hey geoff? the whole idea of the original point made by janina was so as
not to have too many if not no periferals attached to the laptop.
As you can appreciate there ain't much space on your lap for synths
hehehe.


Shaun..
"Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Tue, 22 May 2001, Geoff Shang wrote:

> Hi:
> 
> Having no speaker is not that big a deal - you could always run a line from
> the device to the laptop's line-in jack and use the laptop's speakers.
> 
> Geoff.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: software speech for speakup

[Shaun Oliver]

ah. that was written before I was aware that there were messages before
speakup comes up so my mistake hehehe.

Shaun..
"Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Tue, 22 May 2001, Geoff Shang wrote:

> On Wed, 16 May 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> 
> > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of system
> > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> 
> Or some other poliphonic soundcard.  Or if you run ESD.
> 
> > 2: Remember that if you do go down the path of software synthesys, you
> > won't have  speech right from the get go when you first turn your machine
> > on.
> 
> AFAIK, no-one has that.  Speakup provides speech from when the kernel
> loads.
> 
> Geoff.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: software speech for speakup

[Shaun Oliver]

I see those comments are gonna come back to haunt me.
Well, yes I agree that a hardware synth costs a hell of alot of $. I was
lucky last year to have had a trust fund mature so I went out and bought a
doubletalk which at the time cost me $400 and it was one of the last ones
that I knew of in the country. Brand new anyway. I will stand to be
corrected. but yes in the situation of a laptop and if there's no other
option, software speech is well worth clock cycles.


Shaun..
"Has anyone ever tasted an "END"? Are they really bitter?"
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Tue, 22 May 2001, Kirk Wood wrote:

> > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of system
> > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> 
> Geoff pointed out that you can get a card with multiple streams. There are
> a number able to do this. But there are other considerations.
> 
> First, *most* of the people asking for this are looking at a particular
> situation. They want the portibility and are well aware there are tradeoffs. 
> (There are always tradeoffs.) Yes, it takes away clock cycles. But if you
> are in a cramped spot and have no room for a synth, the clock cycle is
> worth it.
> 
> Second, you can always add another sound card if it only handles one
> stream. Last time I looked, I could buy a sound card for as little as
> $5. And many have modules available. Even a $35 card is cheaper then any
> hardware synth.
> 
> Pointing out the problems with software speech is pointless. Most of those
> posting with the desire to see this are aware there are problems. They
> already know that this will take time. And also, don't asume they are
> somehow less understanding of the advantages of a hardware synth. In my
> not so humble opinion making computing more affordable is a reasonable end
> in itself. Software speech can drop the cost of this by almost a
> grand. We are not talking chump change. The lowest cost hardware synth I
> know of is over $200. If $200 is chump change to any list members please
> let me know. I will personally put forth the time to get a
> "scholarship" program started for synths helping out those who don't have
> that kind of money burning.
> 
> =======
> Kirk Wood
> Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> 
> Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: software speech for speakup

[Gregory Nowak]

If you buy that $5 card, how long will you get to use it before it goes out of your box and in to the trash?
In some situations that I've seen, not long. 
Also, if $200 is chump change for anyone, then please let me know.
I've got 2 486 machines in to which I would love to stick a doubletalk Pc instead of a bns on the serial port.
However, I don't have $630 to spend right now.
Greg


On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 12:31:12AM -0500, Kirk Wood wrote:
> > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of system
> > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> 
> Geoff pointed out that you can get a card with multiple streams. There are
> a number able to do this. But there are other considerations.
> 
> First, *most* of the people asking for this are looking at a particular
> situation. They want the portibility and are well aware there are tradeoffs. 
> (There are always tradeoffs.) Yes, it takes away clock cycles. But if you
> are in a cramped spot and have no room for a synth, the clock cycle is
> worth it.
> 
> Second, you can always add another sound card if it only handles one
> stream. Last time I looked, I could buy a sound card for as little as
> $5. And many have modules available. Even a $35 card is cheaper then any
> hardware synth.
> 
> Pointing out the problems with software speech is pointless. Most of those
> posting with the desire to see this are aware there are problems. They
> already know that this will take time. And also, don't asume they are
> somehow less understanding of the advantages of a hardware synth. In my
> not so humble opinion making computing more affordable is a reasonable end
> in itself. Software speech can drop the cost of this by almost a
> grand. We are not talking chump change. The lowest cost hardware synth I
> know of is over $200. If $200 is chump change to any list members please
> let me know. I will personally put forth the time to get a
> "scholarship" program started for synths helping out those who don't have
> that kind of money burning.
> 
> =======
> Kirk Wood
> Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> 
> Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: software speech for speakup

[Bruce Kingsbury]

> > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of system
> > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.

How much is "a great deal" exactly..? software speech was possible on my
old 386 and even the most low-end pentium runs 50 times the speed of that!
tts takes only a tiny fraction of the CPU power required for speech
recongition or a winmodem.

> Geoff pointed out that you can get a card with multiple streams. There are
> a number able to do this. But there are other considerations.

Not a consideration at all, 'esd' will happily mix as many different
audio streams as you want and play them all through a simple SB16 or
onboard ES chip.. just make your TTS output through esd rather than
direct to /dev/dsp

Re: software speech for speakup

[Shaun Oliver]

man I wrote those words over a month ago. hahahahaha.


On Sun, 10 Jun 2001, Bruce Kingsbury wrote:

> 
> > > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of system
> > > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> 
> How much is "a great deal" exactly..? software speech was possible on my
> old 386 and even the most low-end pentium runs 50 times the speed of that!
> tts takes only a tiny fraction of the CPU power required for speech
> recongition or a winmodem.
> 
> > Geoff pointed out that you can get a card with multiple streams. There are
> > a number able to do this. But there are other considerations.
> 
> Not a consideration at all, 'esd' will happily mix as many different
> audio streams as you want and play them all through a simple SB16 or
> onboard ES chip.. just make your TTS output through esd rather than
> direct to /dev/dsp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: software speech for speakup

[Shaun Oliver]

wow! I remember writing those exact words over a month ago or close to
anyway.
Shaun..


On Sun, 10 Jun 2001, Bruce Kingsbury wrote:

> 
> > > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of system
> > > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> 
> How much is "a great deal" exactly..? software speech was possible on my
> old 386 and even the most low-end pentium runs 50 times the speed of that!
> tts takes only a tiny fraction of the CPU power required for speech
> recongition or a winmodem.
> 
> > Geoff pointed out that you can get a card with multiple streams. There are
> > a number able to do this. But there are other considerations.
> 
> Not a consideration at all, 'esd' will happily mix as many different
> audio streams as you want and play them all through a simple SB16 or
> onboard ES chip.. just make your TTS output through esd rather than
> direct to /dev/dsp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kerry Hoath]

You're over symplifying here. Good text to speech with real speech
synthesis for example rsynth requires a fair bit of floating point to achieve.
It would run a tad slugishly on my 486dx/33 with 80% cpu usage.
I'd hardly call this minimal cpu cycles.
What text to speech used to run on your 386? sbtalker? That's got more
than one patent on it and we can't use their technology even if they would
give it to us.

Yes esound can mix audio streams but now we need to wait not only for the sound
drivers to load but we'd better hope esound initializes properly or we get no speech.
Note that mixing channels in software with esound is expensive cpu-wise, and
we're allready burning cycles in kernel space for speakup and for the synthesis.
Also note that we need to retain some degree of responsiveness with this system; how long
is it going to take when we hit the shut up key for all the buffers to empty or for outgoing
speech to be killed? Do we have a synthesis buffer that must also be flushed?

I'm one of the first ones to say I want software speech for speakup one day, but let's firstly
get in kernel speech (tuxtalk) working so we have a
small free speech engine available for our use.
Using IBM Viavoice isn't an option for everyone since there are lisencing restrictions.

Regards, Kerry.
On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 11:21:30PM +1200, Bruce Kingsbury wrote:
> 
> > > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of system
> > > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> 
> How much is "a great deal" exactly..? software speech was possible on my
> old 386 and even the most low-end pentium runs 50 times the speed of that!
> tts takes only a tiny fraction of the CPU power required for speech
> recongition or a winmodem.
> 
> > Geoff pointed out that you can get a card with multiple streams. There are
> > a number able to do this. But there are other considerations.
> 
> Not a consideration at all, 'esd' will happily mix as many different
> audio streams as you want and play them all through a simple SB16 or
> onboard ES chip.. just make your TTS output through esd rather than
> direct to /dev/dsp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
--
Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
ICQ UIN: 8226547

Re: software speech for speakup

[Kirk Wood]

> How much is "a great deal" exactly..? software speech was possible on my
> old 386 and even the most low-end pentium runs 50 times the speed of that!
> tts takes only a tiny fraction of the CPU power required for speech
> recongition or a winmodem.

While Kerry already pointed out some other simplifications, this is an
very gross example. First, the math is wrong on. Few of us can afford a
machine with the 1.2 GHz machine to get 50 times the clock speed of a 25
MHz machine from the 486 days. But there are other factors like the fact
that doubling the clock speed doesn't yeild a machine twice as fast. In
fact, the high end machine today is not even 10 times as fast as the 486
of yesteryear. This is not saying anything for those poor soulds who are
still chugging along on old hardware since it is cheaper to keep what you
have then buy new.

As for the amount of processor time eaten by the winmodem, I don't think
it is eating nearly as much as you seem to think. Certainly downloading a
file using a winmodem doesn't slow the system down as much as any software
speech I have yet to see on the winblows machines. And yes, I have some
experiance to see both.

Finally, perhaps you should also learn to hit the reply instead of reply
to all.

=======
Kirk Wood
Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net

Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Geoff Shang]

Hi:

Arts will also mix stuff and, from initial testing, looks pretty promising
(though they need to implement recording as Kirk rudely found out the other
day).

Geoff.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Victor Tsaran]

Geoff, what is this about?
Vic

----- Original Message -----
From: "Geoff Shang" <gshang@uq.net.au>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Cc: "Kirk Wood" <cpt.kirk@1tree.net>
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2001 11:23 PM
Subject: Re: software speech for speakup


> Hi:
>
> Arts will also mix stuff and, from initial testing, looks pretty promising
> (though they need to implement recording as Kirk rudely found out the
other
> day).
>
> Geoff.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: software speech for speakup

[Geoff Shang]

Hi:

Arts is a daemon like ESD.  It can do sound mixing and a bunch of other
cool stuff.  It was originally part of KDE butis now available on its own.
But it's not quite finished yet.

Geoff.


-- 
Geoff Shang <gshang10@scu.edu.au>
ICQ number 43634701

Re: software speech for speakup

[Shaun Oliver]

hey kerry? what's the betting he used monolog? hahaha
a doubletalk clone basicly.


Shaun..
"We realise we have a problem with communication. However, we're not going
to discuss it with our staff."
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Kerry Hoath wrote:

> You're over symplifying here. Good text to speech with real speech
> synthesis for example rsynth requires a fair bit of floating point to achieve.
> It would run a tad slugishly on my 486dx/33 with 80% cpu usage.
> I'd hardly call this minimal cpu cycles.
> What text to speech used to run on your 386? sbtalker? That's got more
> than one patent on it and we can't use their technology even if they would
> give it to us.
> 
> Yes esound can mix audio streams but now we need to wait not only for the sound
> drivers to load but we'd better hope esound initializes properly or we get no speech.
> Note that mixing channels in software with esound is expensive cpu-wise, and
> we're allready burning cycles in kernel space for speakup and for the synthesis.
> Also note that we need to retain some degree of responsiveness with this system; how long
> is it going to take when we hit the shut up key for all the buffers to empty or for outgoing
> speech to be killed? Do we have a synthesis buffer that must also be flushed?
> 
> I'm one of the first ones to say I want software speech for speakup one day, but let's firstly
> get in kernel speech (tuxtalk) working so we have a
> small free speech engine available for our use.
> Using IBM Viavoice isn't an option for everyone since there are lisencing restrictions.
> 
> Regards, Kerry.
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 11:21:30PM +1200, Bruce Kingsbury wrote:
> > 
> > > > 1: aAs far as I'm aware, software synthesys ties up a great deal of system
> > > > resources including the sound card unless of course you run a sb-live.
> > 
> > How much is "a great deal" exactly..? software speech was possible on my
> > old 386 and even the most low-end pentium runs 50 times the speed of that!
> > tts takes only a tiny fraction of the CPU power required for speech
> > recongition or a winmodem.
> > 
> > > Geoff pointed out that you can get a card with multiple streams. There are
> > > a number able to do this. But there are other considerations.
> > 
> > Not a consideration at all, 'esd' will happily mix as many different
> > audio streams as you want and play them all through a simple SB16 or
> > onboard ES chip.. just make your TTS output through esd rather than
> > direct to /dev/dsp
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 
> -- 
> --
> Kerry Hoath: kerry@gotss.net
> alternatives: kerry@gotss.eu.org or kerry@gotss.spice.net.au
> ICQ UIN: 8226547
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: software speech for speakup

[Shaun Oliver]

I think I'd have to agree with both kirk and kerry on this 1.
While I enjoy the processing power of my pentium 200, I still feel as if a
processor that is at least 4-5 times faster if thatfor audio work. but, if
linux had a half decent audio multitracking program I'd probably not have
need for a pentium 3 or faster.
but having said that, I suggest that you go back to school and redo your
calculations. my pentium 200 is considerably faster than my 486 but not
that fast.
and as for software speech, the load that a decent software synth places
on a cpu ain't worth the clock cycles as far as I'm concerned. not on a
desk top anyway.


Shaun..
"We realise we have a problem with communication. However, we're not going
to discuss it with our staff."
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Sun, 10 Jun 2001, Kirk Wood wrote:

> > How much is "a great deal" exactly..? software speech was possible on my
> > old 386 and even the most low-end pentium runs 50 times the speed of that!
> > tts takes only a tiny fraction of the CPU power required for speech
> > recongition or a winmodem.
> 
> While Kerry already pointed out some other simplifications, this is an
> very gross example. First, the math is wrong on. Few of us can afford a
> machine with the 1.2 GHz machine to get 50 times the clock speed of a 25
> MHz machine from the 486 days. But there are other factors like the fact
> that doubling the clock speed doesn't yeild a machine twice as fast. In
> fact, the high end machine today is not even 10 times as fast as the 486
> of yesteryear. This is not saying anything for those poor soulds who are
> still chugging along on old hardware since it is cheaper to keep what you
> have then buy new.
> 
> As for the amount of processor time eaten by the winmodem, I don't think
> it is eating nearly as much as you seem to think. Certainly downloading a
> file using a winmodem doesn't slow the system down as much as any software
> speech I have yet to see on the winblows machines. And yes, I have some
> experiance to see both.
> 
> Finally, perhaps you should also learn to hit the reply instead of reply
> to all.
> 
> =======
> Kirk Wood
> Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> 
> Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: software speech for speakup

[Geoff Shang]

On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:

> While I enjoy the processing power of my pentium 200, I still feel as if a
> processor that is at least 4-5 times faster if thatfor audio work. but, if
> linux had a half decent audio multitracking program I'd probably not have
> need for a pentium 3 or faster.

It'll be here soon.  The ardour package is being modified to include a
keyboard interface and the work is reportedly going very well.

Geoff.

Re: software speech for speakup

[Shaun Oliver]

kewl!


Shaun..
"We realise we have a problem with communication. However, we're not going
to discuss it with our staff."
EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
www.jong.com:6667

On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Geoff Shang wrote:

> On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
> 
> > While I enjoy the processing power of my pentium 200, I still feel as if a
> > processor that is at least 4-5 times faster if thatfor audio work. but, if
> > linux had a half decent audio multitracking program I'd probably not have
> > need for a pentium 3 or faster.
> 
> It'll be here soon.  The ardour package is being modified to include a
> keyboard interface and the work is reportedly going very well.
> 
> Geoff.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

Re: software speech for speakup

[Victor Tsaran]

Shon, if you hear somewhere of a good text-based audio multitracking
software, give us all a loud buzz!
Vic

----- Original Message -----
From: "Shaun Oliver" <shauno@goanna.net.au>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: software speech for speakup


> I think I'd have to agree with both kirk and kerry on this 1.
> While I enjoy the processing power of my pentium 200, I still feel as if a
> processor that is at least 4-5 times faster if thatfor audio work. but, if
> linux had a half decent audio multitracking program I'd probably not have
> need for a pentium 3 or faster.
> but having said that, I suggest that you go back to school and redo your
> calculations. my pentium 200 is considerably faster than my 486 but not
> that fast.
> and as for software speech, the load that a decent software synth places
> on a cpu ain't worth the clock cycles as far as I'm concerned. not on a
> desk top anyway.
>
>
> Shaun..
> "We realise we have a problem with communication. However, we're not going
> to discuss it with our staff."
> EMAIL: shauno@goanna.net.au ICQ: 76958435
> YAHOO ID: blindman01_2000 IRC NICK/SERVER: |3|1ndm4n on #aussiefriends on
> www.jong.com:6667
>
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2001, Kirk Wood wrote:
>
> > > How much is "a great deal" exactly..? software speech was possible on
my
> > > old 386 and even the most low-end pentium runs 50 times the speed of
that!
> > > tts takes only a tiny fraction of the CPU power required for speech
> > > recongition or a winmodem.
> >
> > While Kerry already pointed out some other simplifications, this is an
> > very gross example. First, the math is wrong on. Few of us can afford a
> > machine with the 1.2 GHz machine to get 50 times the clock speed of a 25
> > MHz machine from the 486 days. But there are other factors like the fact
> > that doubling the clock speed doesn't yeild a machine twice as fast. In
> > fact, the high end machine today is not even 10 times as fast as the 486
> > of yesteryear. This is not saying anything for those poor soulds who are
> > still chugging along on old hardware since it is cheaper to keep what
you
> > have then buy new.
> >
> > As for the amount of processor time eaten by the winmodem, I don't think
> > it is eating nearly as much as you seem to think. Certainly downloading
a
> > file using a winmodem doesn't slow the system down as much as any
software
> > speech I have yet to see on the winblows machines. And yes, I have some
> > experiance to see both.
> >
> > Finally, perhaps you should also learn to hit the reply instead of reply
> > to all.
> >
> > =======
> > Kirk Wood
> > Cpt.Kirk@1tree.net
> >
> > Nothing is hard if you know the answer or are used to doing it.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: software speech for speakup

[Victor Tsaran]

OK, very good news. Is that about Awsome?
Vic

----- Original Message -----
From: "Geoff Shang" <gshang@uq.net.au>
To: <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 2:57 PM
Subject: Re: software speech for speakup


> On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Shaun Oliver wrote:
>
> > While I enjoy the processing power of my pentium 200, I still feel as if
a
> > processor that is at least 4-5 times faster if thatfor audio work. but,
if
> > linux had a half decent audio multitracking program I'd probably not
have
> > need for a pentium 3 or faster.
>
> It'll be here soon.  The ardour package is being modified to include a
> keyboard interface and the work is reportedly going very well.
>
> Geoff.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>

Re: Software Speech for Speakup

[Steve Holmes]

Does this mean the synth driver would need to be run as a daemon,
continually polling from /dev/softsynth?  If so, hence the meaning of
"speech server".  I'll have to look at the fopen or open function
documentation to see how to open in non-block mode.  Conceptually, it
sounds pretty easy.  But I could probably get fooled by that notion <heheheh>.

On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 01:05:50PM -0500, Kirk Reiser wrote:
> That's about right.  YOu open the /dev/softsynth device in nonblocking
> mode and pass the output to your software synth.  You will have to do
> translation of the doubletalk style synth control strings into the
> strings needed for whatever synth you are going to talk to.
> 
>   Kirk
> 

-- 
HolmesGrown Solutions
The best solutions for the best price!
http://ld.net/?holmesgrown

Re: Software Speech for Speakup

[Kirk Reiser]

That's about right.  YOu open the /dev/softsynth device in nonblocking
mode and pass the output to your software synth.  You will have to do
translation of the doubletalk style synth control strings into the
strings needed for whatever synth you are going to talk to.

  Kirk

-- 

Kirk Reiser				The Computer Braille Facility
e-mail: kirk@braille.uwo.ca		University of Western Ontario
phone: (519) 661-3061

Re: Software Speech for Speakup

[Steve Holmes]

Well, where do I start:)? I'm assuming output from speakup is piped
into /dev/softsynth, assuming /proc/synth_name is set to sftsynth?
What does the softsynth device do with it from there? Does the "middle
ware" some how read the device and call up whatever speech TTS library
being used?

Thanks.

On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 07:00:59AM -0500, Kirk Reiser wrote:
> Well, it is on my list but I have no idea when I'll get to it so if
> you are interested then do it.  What is your fear of duplicating a
> little work it would be a good learning experience for you in any
> event and that wouldn't be a waste.
> 
> c 10,26 are the parameters you give mknod to create the softsynth
> device in the /dev directory thusly:
> 
> mknod /dev/softsynth c 10 26
> 
> You can do a man mknod for more informative information.
> 
>   Kirk

-- 
HolmesGrown Solutions
The best solutions for the best price!
http://ld.net/?holmesgrown

Re: Software Speech for Speakup

[Kirk Reiser]

Well, it is on my list but I have no idea when I'll get to it so if
you are interested then do it.  What is your fear of duplicating a
little work it would be a good learning experience for you in any
event and that wouldn't be a waste.

c 10,26 are the parameters you give mknod to create the softsynth
device in the /dev directory thusly:

mknod /dev/softsynth c 10 26

You can do a man mknod for more informative information.

  Kirk

-- 

Kirk Reiser				The Computer Braille Facility
e-mail: kirk@braille.uwo.ca		University of Western Ontario
phone: (519) 661-3061

Software Speech for Speakup

[Steve Holmes]

I thought I'd put the question up again since I never heard any
replies before.  Is work currently underway already for connecting
Speakup to the software DECtalk? if not, I would be interested in
seeing what I could do.  I now have emacspeak going with it and it
seems pretty slick.  I'm wondering how difficult it would be to port
the emacspeak speech server to speakup middleware.  

If this is being done by someone else, it would be no point in my
doing it again.  If not, then what background info do I need to get
this to happen? I don't quite understand how to work with that new
softsynth device - c 10,26; I know that plays into things somehow.

-- 
HolmesGrown Solutions
The best solutions for the best price!
http://ld.net/?holmesgrown