rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[William Hubbs]

All,

speakup does a number of things to have all of the characters and
punctuation marks pronounced the same way for all of the synthesizers it
supports instead of allowing the synthesizers to process them.

The disadvantage of this is primarily obvious for internationalization.
We are forcing English pronunciations instead of allowing the
synthesizer to pronounce things in the correct language.

For the softsynth, there is a direct option, which  passes things
straight to the synthesizer.  I am wondering though if we should  just
get rid of all of the character and punctuation processing that is part
of speakup and allow the synthesizer to handle this?

This is just an idea right now.  I am not planning on doing this without
discussion; I am wondering at this point what others think.

So, your input is welcome.

Thanks,

William

Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[Tyler Littlefield]

Why not an option that would allow for speakup to handle punctuation or to bypass the speakup punctuation and pass it off to the synth for processing?

		Thanks,
Tyler Littlefield
	http://tds-solutions.net
	Twitter: sorressean

On Apr 25, 2010, at 3:23 PM, William Hubbs wrote:

> All,
> 
> speakup does a number of things to have all of the characters and
> punctuation marks pronounced the same way for all of the synthesizers it
> supports instead of allowing the synthesizers to process them.
> 
> The disadvantage of this is primarily obvious for internationalization.
> We are forcing English pronunciations instead of allowing the
> synthesizer to pronounce things in the correct language.
> 
> For the softsynth, there is a direct option, which  passes things
> straight to the synthesizer.  I am wondering though if we should  just
> get rid of all of the character and punctuation processing that is part
> of speakup and allow the synthesizer to handle this?
> 
> This is just an idea right now.  I am not planning on doing this without
> discussion; I am wondering at this point what others think.
> 
> So, your input is welcome.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> William
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[Gregory Nowak]

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

I'd say to just let the synthesizer deal with pronunciation, though
the best of both worlds would be to allow the user to switch among
both options, perhaps by loading a pronunciation dictionary to
somewhere under /sys/accessibility/speakup, as is done with chartab
and friends now.

Greg


On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 04:23:19PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
> 
> speakup does a number of things to have all of the characters and
> punctuation marks pronounced the same way for all of the synthesizers it
> supports instead of allowing the synthesizers to process them.
> 
> The disadvantage of this is primarily obvious for internationalization.
> We are forcing English pronunciations instead of allowing the
> synthesizer to pronounce things in the correct language.
> 
> For the softsynth, there is a direct option, which  passes things
> straight to the synthesizer.  I am wondering though if we should  just
> get rid of all of the character and punctuation processing that is part
> of speakup and allow the synthesizer to handle this?
> 
> This is just an idea right now.  I am not planning on doing this without
> discussion; I am wondering at this point what others think.
> 
> So, your input is welcome.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> William
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

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

- --
Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkvUtKEACgkQ7s9z/XlyUyArqQCfY3WnKts0e6wP69aOqQYRgFiE
J1sAoMN6J74knvk8i1Mh7pdwSo0mUZ8A
=430V
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[William Hubbs]

Hi Tyler,

well, another thing that is happening is the thread that is going on on
the list about the speakup punctuation level and the reading punctuation
level.  These are controled by speakup's internal punctuation
processing, and have nothing to do with the way the synthesizer handles
punctuation.

The issue is that a user can control both the synthesizer punctuation
and the speakup punctuation levels and they are not related to each
other at all.  IMHO this is confusing, and we should just have the synth
handle punctuation.

William

On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 03:25:34PM -0600, Tyler Littlefield wrote:
> Why not an option that would allow for speakup to handle punctuation or to bypass the speakup punctuation and pass it off to the synth for processing?
> 
> 		Thanks,
> Tyler Littlefield
> 	http://tds-solutions.net
> 	Twitter: sorressean
> 
> On Apr 25, 2010, at 3:23 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> 
> > All,
> > 
> > speakup does a number of things to have all of the characters and
> > punctuation marks pronounced the same way for all of the synthesizers it
> > supports instead of allowing the synthesizers to process them.
> > 
> > The disadvantage of this is primarily obvious for internationalization.
> > We are forcing English pronunciations instead of allowing the
> > synthesizer to pronounce things in the correct language.
> > 
> > For the softsynth, there is a direct option, which  passes things
> > straight to the synthesizer.  I am wondering though if we should  just
> > get rid of all of the character and punctuation processing that is part
> > of speakup and allow the synthesizer to handle this?
> > 
> > This is just an idea right now.  I am not planning on doing this without
> > discussion; I am wondering at this point what others think.
> > 
> > So, your input is welcome.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > William
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[William Hubbs]

Hi Greg,

an exception dictionary would be a good idea, but I'm thinking that we
should put that at the synthesizer level.  AFAIK, this is supported by
the hardware synths right?

William

On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 02:31:13PM -0700, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> I'd say to just let the synthesizer deal with pronunciation, though
> the best of both worlds would be to allow the user to switch among
> both options, perhaps by loading a pronunciation dictionary to
> somewhere under /sys/accessibility/speakup, as is done with chartab
> and friends now.
> 
> Greg
> 
> 
> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 04:23:19PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> > All,
> > 
> > speakup does a number of things to have all of the characters and
> > punctuation marks pronounced the same way for all of the synthesizers it
> > supports instead of allowing the synthesizers to process them.
> > 
> > The disadvantage of this is primarily obvious for internationalization.
> > We are forcing English pronunciations instead of allowing the
> > synthesizer to pronounce things in the correct language.
> > 
> > For the softsynth, there is a direct option, which  passes things
> > straight to the synthesizer.  I am wondering though if we should  just
> > get rid of all of the character and punctuation processing that is part
> > of speakup and allow the synthesizer to handle this?
> > 
> > This is just an idea right now.  I am not planning on doing this without
> > discussion; I am wondering at this point what others think.
> > 
> > So, your input is welcome.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > William
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > 
> 
> - -- 
> web site: http://www.romuald.net.eu.org
> gpg public key: http://www.romuald.net.eu.org/pubkey.asc
> skype: gregn1
> (authorization required, add me to your contacts list first)
> 
> - --
> Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iEYEARECAAYFAkvUtKEACgkQ7s9z/XlyUyArqQCfY3WnKts0e6wP69aOqQYRgFiE
> J1sAoMN6J74knvk8i1Mh7pdwSo0mUZ8A
> =430V
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[Tyler Littlefield]

I see what your saying, I just thought that allowing the user to control whether or not speakup did the processing was a sort of fix for all. I'm not even sure that would help/solve the problem, was just a suggestion.
		Thanks,
Tyler Littlefield
	http://tds-solutions.net
	Twitter: sorressean

On Apr 25, 2010, at 4:14 PM, William Hubbs wrote:

> Hi Tyler,
> 
> well, another thing that is happening is the thread that is going on on
> the list about the speakup punctuation level and the reading punctuation
> level.  These are controled by speakup's internal punctuation
> processing, and have nothing to do with the way the synthesizer handles
> punctuation.
> 
> The issue is that a user can control both the synthesizer punctuation
> and the speakup punctuation levels and they are not related to each
> other at all.  IMHO this is confusing, and we should just have the synth
> handle punctuation.
> 
> William
> 
> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 03:25:34PM -0600, Tyler Littlefield wrote:
>> Why not an option that would allow for speakup to handle punctuation or to bypass the speakup punctuation and pass it off to the synth for processing?
>> 
>> 		Thanks,
>> Tyler Littlefield
>> 	http://tds-solutions.net
>> 	Twitter: sorressean
>> 
>> On Apr 25, 2010, at 3:23 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>> 
>>> All,
>>> 
>>> speakup does a number of things to have all of the characters and
>>> punctuation marks pronounced the same way for all of the synthesizers it
>>> supports instead of allowing the synthesizers to process them.
>>> 
>>> The disadvantage of this is primarily obvious for internationalization.
>>> We are forcing English pronunciations instead of allowing the
>>> synthesizer to pronounce things in the correct language.
>>> 
>>> For the softsynth, there is a direct option, which  passes things
>>> straight to the synthesizer.  I am wondering though if we should  just
>>> get rid of all of the character and punctuation processing that is part
>>> of speakup and allow the synthesizer to handle this?
>>> 
>>> This is just an idea right now.  I am not planning on doing this without
>>> discussion; I am wondering at this point what others think.
>>> 
>>> So, your input is welcome.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> William
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[Alex H.]

Hi,

I think there should be an option just to toggel "controlled by synth'
or 'controlled by speakup', there are advantages to both.

Alex

On 4/25/10, William Hubbs <w.d.hubbs@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> an exception dictionary would be a good idea, but I'm thinking that we
> should put that at the synthesizer level.  AFAIK, this is supported by
> the hardware synths right?
>
> William
>
> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 02:31:13PM -0700, Gregory Nowak wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> I'd say to just let the synthesizer deal with pronunciation, though
>> the best of both worlds would be to allow the user to switch among
>> both options, perhaps by loading a pronunciation dictionary to
>> somewhere under /sys/accessibility/speakup, as is done with chartab
>> and friends now.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 04:23:19PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
>> > All,
>> >
>> > speakup does a number of things to have all of the characters and
>> > punctuation marks pronounced the same way for all of the synthesizers it
>> > supports instead of allowing the synthesizers to process them.
>> >
>> > The disadvantage of this is primarily obvious for internationalization.
>> > We are forcing English pronunciations instead of allowing the
>> > synthesizer to pronounce things in the correct language.
>> >
>> > For the softsynth, there is a direct option, which  passes things
>> > straight to the synthesizer.  I am wondering though if we should  just
>> > get rid of all of the character and punctuation processing that is part
>> > of speakup and allow the synthesizer to handle this?
>> >
>> > This is just an idea right now.  I am not planning on doing this without
>> > discussion; I am wondering at this point what others think.
>> >
>> > So, your input is welcome.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > William
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Speakup mailing list
>> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
>> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>> >
>>
>> - --
>> web site: http://www.romuald.net.eu.org
>> gpg public key: http://www.romuald.net.eu.org/pubkey.asc
>> skype: gregn1
>> (authorization required, add me to your contacts list first)
>>
>> - --
>> Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>>
>> iEYEARECAAYFAkvUtKEACgkQ7s9z/XlyUyArqQCfY3WnKts0e6wP69aOqQYRgFiE
>> J1sAoMN6J74knvk8i1Mh7pdwSo0mUZ8A
>> =430V
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[William Hubbs]

Hi Alex,

I think we can provide the same thing by moving the pronunciation
control to the synth's exception dictionary instead of having speakup
do it.

What advantages do you see in having speakup control the punctuation and
character processing instead of having the synth do it?

William

On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 05:22:42PM -0500, Alex H. wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I think there should be an option just to toggel "controlled by synth'
> or 'controlled by speakup', there are advantages to both.
> 
> Alex
> 
> On 4/25/10, William Hubbs <w.d.hubbs@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Greg,
> >
> > an exception dictionary would be a good idea, but I'm thinking that we
> > should put that at the synthesizer level.  AFAIK, this is supported by
> > the hardware synths right?
> >
> > William
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 02:31:13PM -0700, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> I'd say to just let the synthesizer deal with pronunciation, though
> >> the best of both worlds would be to allow the user to switch among
> >> both options, perhaps by loading a pronunciation dictionary to
> >> somewhere under /sys/accessibility/speakup, as is done with chartab
> >> and friends now.
> >>
> >> Greg
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 04:23:19PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> >> > All,
> >> >
> >> > speakup does a number of things to have all of the characters and
> >> > punctuation marks pronounced the same way for all of the synthesizers it
> >> > supports instead of allowing the synthesizers to process them.
> >> >
> >> > The disadvantage of this is primarily obvious for internationalization.
> >> > We are forcing English pronunciations instead of allowing the
> >> > synthesizer to pronounce things in the correct language.
> >> >
> >> > For the softsynth, there is a direct option, which  passes things
> >> > straight to the synthesizer.  I am wondering though if we should  just
> >> > get rid of all of the character and punctuation processing that is part
> >> > of speakup and allow the synthesizer to handle this?
> >> >
> >> > This is just an idea right now.  I am not planning on doing this without
> >> > discussion; I am wondering at this point what others think.
> >> >
> >> > So, your input is welcome.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> >
> >> > William
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > Speakup mailing list
> >> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> >> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> >> >
> >>
> >> - --
> >> web site: http://www.romuald.net.eu.org
> >> gpg public key: http://www.romuald.net.eu.org/pubkey.asc
> >> skype: gregn1
> >> (authorization required, add me to your contacts list first)
> >>
> >> - --
> >> Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
> >>
> >> iEYEARECAAYFAkvUtKEACgkQ7s9z/XlyUyArqQCfY3WnKts0e6wP69aOqQYRgFiE
> >> J1sAoMN6J74knvk8i1Mh7pdwSo0mUZ8A
> >> =430V
> >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[Hart Larry]

Well, William-and-All, since I am not a programmer, if Speakup did not handle 
these events, would I need to learn phonetics-and-program the DecTalk USB 
directly?
In the 6years I've been on this list, I must have mentioned that as far as I 
know, the only Linux screen-readers which have an exception dictionary are 
Emacs Speak  and Jupiter.  I think practicly every single windows reader has 
one, I think including the free N V D A
Also, in a perfect World, I would be great, such as Vocal-Eyes did in DOS, to 
have separate character and kek label dictionaries, so maybe you want to hear 
characters such as under-lines while arrowing, but not while reading.
Thanks for listening
Hart

Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[Chris Brannon]

William Hubbs wrote:
> The issue is that a user can control both the synthesizer punctuation
> and the speakup punctuation levels and they are not related to each
> other at all.  IMHO this is confusing, and we should just have the synth
> handle punctuation.

Yeah, it is confusing, and I more-or-less agree with you here.
In the case of software synthesizers, we should just drop the character
processing.  Punt the problem to the synth.
And let Speakup's punctuation-setting commands control the synthesizer's
punctuation level.
I'm not sure about hardware.

There's one character that we still need to pronounce: the space.  If
you use direct mode, you'll notice that space is never spoken!
I wonder whether most folks consider this annoying?

-- Chris

Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[William Hubbs]

On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 03:53:50PM -0700, Hart Larry wrote:
> Well, William-and-All, since I am not a programmer, if Speakup did not handle 
> these events, would I need to learn phonetics-and-program the DecTalk USB 
> directly?

I don't think so.  I want to look at the synthesizer documentation and
see how they work.  I believe most of them have an exception dictionary
internally which could be programmed.  If I don't use that, it might be
possible to implement a simple exception dictionary in speakup,.

William

Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[covici]

Well, if you try to use the exception dictionaries for all the hardware
synths, this could become much more tricky whereas if you have speakup
do it its the same for all synths.  Also, it would mean that the
definition of most, some or all would be different for each synth,
creating more confusion.  However a direct option for hardware synths as
well as the software one would not be a bad idea.

William Hubbs <w.d.hubbs@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Alex,
> 
> I think we can provide the same thing by moving the pronunciation
> control to the synth's exception dictionary instead of having speakup
> do it.
> 
> What advantages do you see in having speakup control the punctuation and
> character processing instead of having the synth do it?
> 
> William
> 
> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 05:22:42PM -0500, Alex H. wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I think there should be an option just to toggel "controlled by synth'
> > or 'controlled by speakup', there are advantages to both.
> > 
> > Alex
> > 
> > On 4/25/10, William Hubbs <w.d.hubbs@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Greg,
> > >
> > > an exception dictionary would be a good idea, but I'm thinking that we
> > > should put that at the synthesizer level.  AFAIK, this is supported by
> > > the hardware synths right?
> > >
> > > William
> > >
> > > On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 02:31:13PM -0700, Gregory Nowak wrote:
> > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > >> Hash: SHA1
> > >>
> > >> I'd say to just let the synthesizer deal with pronunciation, though
> > >> the best of both worlds would be to allow the user to switch among
> > >> both options, perhaps by loading a pronunciation dictionary to
> > >> somewhere under /sys/accessibility/speakup, as is done with chartab
> > >> and friends now.
> > >>
> > >> Greg
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 04:23:19PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> > >> > All,
> > >> >
> > >> > speakup does a number of things to have all of the characters and
> > >> > punctuation marks pronounced the same way for all of the synthesizers it
> > >> > supports instead of allowing the synthesizers to process them.
> > >> >
> > >> > The disadvantage of this is primarily obvious for internationalization.
> > >> > We are forcing English pronunciations instead of allowing the
> > >> > synthesizer to pronounce things in the correct language.
> > >> >
> > >> > For the softsynth, there is a direct option, which  passes things
> > >> > straight to the synthesizer.  I am wondering though if we should  just
> > >> > get rid of all of the character and punctuation processing that is part
> > >> > of speakup and allow the synthesizer to handle this?
> > >> >
> > >> > This is just an idea right now.  I am not planning on doing this without
> > >> > discussion; I am wondering at this point what others think.
> > >> >
> > >> > So, your input is welcome.
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks,
> > >> >
> > >> > William
> > >> >
> > >> > _______________________________________________
> > >> > Speakup mailing list
> > >> > Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> > >> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> - --
> > >> web site: http://www.romuald.net.eu.org
> > >> gpg public key: http://www.romuald.net.eu.org/pubkey.asc
> > >> skype: gregn1
> > >> (authorization required, add me to your contacts list first)
> > >>
> > >> - --
> > >> Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
> > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > >> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
> > >>
> > >> iEYEARECAAYFAkvUtKEACgkQ7s9z/XlyUyArqQCfY3WnKts0e6wP69aOqQYRgFiE
> > >> J1sAoMN6J74knvk8i1Mh7pdwSo0mUZ8A
> > >> =430V
> > >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[Gregory Nowak]

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

Hi William and all.

On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 05:17:40PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> an exception dictionary would be a good idea, but I'm thinking that we
> should put that at the synthesizer level.  AFAIK, this is supported by
> the hardware synths right?

Yes, but when I made the suggestion, I had ease of use in mind. As
heart pointed out, not everyone is going to know how to use the
pronunciation dictionary in their synth, unless they read, and
understand the synth manual. Whereas if this is done with speakup,
then setting up a pronunciation dictionary would be the same, no
matter the synth being used. You do have a good point though, relying
on the synth's own pronunciation dictionary would make things less tricky, as far as
speakup development goes.

To address something else Chris pointed out, yes, not hearing space be
pronounced when you read the screen character by character would be
annoying, to me at least. You could set the synth's punctuation to
full/total when the screen review keys to read char by char are being used, but that would
open a whole new can of worms.

Greg


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

- --
Free domains: http://www.eu.org/ or mail dns-manager@EU.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkvVN+YACgkQ7s9z/XlyUyBnMgCfcMFWvwMSjbhnroz08Bl5PHss
mm0An1M0uOh1zDl9A9KxfVae+6PLwnA4
=STMq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[Jason White]

Gregory Nowak <greg@romuald.net.eu.org> writes:

> Yes, but when I made the suggestion, I had ease of use in mind. As
> heart pointed out, not everyone is going to know how to use the
> pronunciation dictionary in their synth, unless they read, and
> understand the synth manual. Whereas if this is done with speakup,
> then setting up a pronunciation dictionary would be the same, no
> matter the synth being used. You do have a good point though, relying
> on the synth's own pronunciation dictionary would make things less tricky, as far as
> speakup development goes.

I agree. However, neither do I understand what the problem is that needs to
be solved.

As explained earlier in the thread, there are currently two means of
handling punctuation:

1. SpeakUp processes it, converting it to text which is sent to the
synthesizer.

2. Alternatively, it is passed to the synthesizer for handling according
to its internal rules and configuration.

I haven't investigated how the punctuation settings currently work, but
the proper solution, it seems to me, if both of the above techniques
were to remain implemented, would be as follows.

1. If SpeakUp is processing punctuation internally, then adjusting the
punctuation settings should change its internal parameters, i.e., vary
its own processing rules.

2. If punctuation is being handled by the synthesizer, then changing the
settings should issue the necessary synthesizer command or API call to
change the synthesizer's internal configuration.

3. Upon start-up, SpeakUp would set the synthesizer's internal
parameters to a known default state (i.e., no punctuation if SpeakUp
itself is handling it internally, or the  configured punctuation level otherwise).

The only ground for confusion that I see here is the case in which the
user selects internal SpeakUp punctuation processing, and also writes
commands directly to the synthesizer after SpeakUp is initialized, which
alter the latter's configuration. However, presumably people who engage
in that sort of manipulation should be assumed to know what they are
doing, or at least to be willing to find out.

Thus I don't think there need be a problem here. That said, I am not
much of a SpeakUp user so I haven't checked out how far my "in
principle" description corresponds to what is actually implemented.

Note further that implementing internal punctuation processing as a
pronunciation dictionary within SpeakUp is a special case of internal
processing as described above.

I am not expressing an opinion as to whether internal processing should
remain an option; if it does, the pronunciation dictionary solution
would seem to me to be the best, as it would allow the details to be
configured according to the synthesizer being used and the user's
requirements.

Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[Willem van der Walt]

Hi William,
I am using speakup with both English and Afrikaans, switching between the 
two as required on the fly.

I just, and this is in a very old speakup, cat a customized characters 
table into the characters entry in the speakup parameters directory and it 
works well.

I have looked into translating the prompts and actually has done some of 
them in Afrikaans a while back as the new speakup allows for that.

I also have a synthesizer here that is under development and does not 
support pronunciation of punctuation and here the way speakup allows for 
sending text strings like comma or ampersand came  in quite useful.

As for pronunciation dictionaries, I would think they should stay at the 
synth level.
Kind regards, Willem

 On Sun, 25 Apr 2010, William Hubbs wrote:

> All,
> 
> speakup does a number of things to have all of the characters and
> punctuation marks pronounced the same way for all of the synthesizers it
> supports instead of allowing the synthesizers to process them.
> 
> The disadvantage of this is primarily obvious for internationalization.
> We are forcing English pronunciations instead of allowing the
> synthesizer to pronounce things in the correct language.
> 
> For the softsynth, there is a direct option, which  passes things
> straight to the synthesizer.  I am wondering though if we should  just
> get rid of all of the character and punctuation processing that is part
> of speakup and allow the synthesizer to handle this?
> 
> This is just an idea right now.  I am not planning on doing this without
> discussion; I am wondering at this point what others think.
> 
> So, your input is welcome.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> William
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
> 

-- 
This message is subject to the CSIR's copyright terms and conditions, e-mail legal notice, and implemented Open Document Format (ODF) standard. 
The full disclaimer details can be found at http://www.csir.co.za/disclaimer.html.

This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, 
and is believed to be clean.  MailScanner thanks Transtec Computers for their support.

Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[Kirk Reiser]

Hey folks: I of course have an oppinion on all of this but am more
interested in bringing a few issues up.  It is true that a lot of
hardware synths provide exception handling rules for pronunciation but
manipulating those rules is often not trivial.  The DoubleTalk family
is an example.  You can have exceptions but you need to compile those
exceptions extermally and then download them to the synth at start up.
As far as I know there is no compiler available for the DoubleTalk
family in gnu/linux.  Also, downloading firmware or exceptions adds
another level of complication to synth initialization which can be
frustrating as many DECTalk PC users can declare.  So, you will need
to either make exception handling software available for all the
hardware/software synths or leave folks basically in the same
situation they are currently.  Even developing exception dictionaries
for the various soft synths is not a trivial matter as anyone that has
tried to make exceptions for espeak/espeakup will tell you.
Fortunately, Jonathan has been very good at updating pronunciations
when it's brought to his attention but what about the other soft
synths like festival?  So although it may be theoretically more
desirable to hand-off processing to the individual synths the
implementation is a whole lot more involved than central processing
one time at the speakup level for all synths even if each synth might
need to be slightly different.

As for levels of punctuation for console output versus reading mode it
isn't really that confusing once you understand it and it was a
feature request which was written because of users desires.  The code
is already there so I don't quite understand the desire to remove the
feature.  If there is confusion I believe it is a documentation lack
and not a difficulty with the implementation.  I do aggree however
that a direct synth mode should be available and I thought we had all
decided that already.  If it hasn't exactly been implemented so far
then it is more a problem of developers not following through than
nondetermination to have the feature.  A toggle to turn processing on
or off depending on users wish is a good idea but is not quite as easy
to implement as one might think and that's why I suspect we're having
this discussion.

So those are my thoughts currently.
   Kirk

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

Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[Gaijin]

On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 04:23:19PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> For the softsynth, there is a direct option, which  passes things
> straight to the synthesizer.  I am wondering though if we should  just
> get rid of all of the character and punctuation processing that is part
> of speakup and allow the synthesizer to handle this?

	I'm all for letting the hardware do it's job, where possible, 
and saving those CPU cycles for actual work.

				Michael

Fwd: Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[William Hubbs]

Hi Kirk and all,

On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 08:22:06AM -0400, Kirk Reiser wrote:
> Hey folks: I of course have an oppinion on all of this but am more
> interested in bringing a few issues up.  It is true that a lot of
> hardware synths provide exception handling rules for pronunciation but
> manipulating those rules is often not trivial.  The DoubleTalk family
> is an example.  You can have exceptions but you need to compile those
> exceptions extermally and then download them to the synth at start up.
> As far as I know there is no compiler available for the DoubleTalk
> family in gnu/linux.  Also, downloading firmware or exceptions adds
> another level of complication to synth initialization which can be
> frustrating as many DECTalk PC users can declare.  So, you will need
> to either make exception handling software available for all the
> hardware/software synths or leave folks basically in the same
> situation they are currently.  Even developing exception dictionaries
> for the various soft synths is not a trivial matter as anyone that has
> tried to make exceptions for espeak/espeakup will tell you.
> Fortunately, Jonathan has been very good at updating pronunciations
> when it's brought to his attention but what about the other soft
> synths like festival?  So although it may be theoretically more
> desirable to hand-off processing to the individual synths the
> implementation is a whole lot more involved than central processing
> one time at the speakup level for all synths even if each synth might
> need to be slightly different.
 
This is a good case for centralized exception processing.  I did not
know what was involved in programming exceptions for the synthesizers.

> As for levels of punctuation for console output versus reading mode it
> isn't really that confusing once you understand it and it was a
> feature request which was written because of users desires.  The code
> is already there so I don't quite understand the desire to remove the
> feature.  If there is confusion I believe it is a documentation lack
> and not a difficulty with the implementation.  I do aggree however
> that a direct synth mode should be available and I thought we had all
> decided that already.  If it hasn't exactly been implemented so far
> then it is more a problem of developers not following through than
> nondetermination to have the feature.  A toggle to turn processing on
> or off depending on users wish is a good idea but is not quite as easy
> to implement as one might think and that's why I suspect we're having
> this discussion.

The direct synth mode is a separate issue, and yes, it should be easy to
implement.  It isjust a matter of adding a few lines to each of the
drivers.  I personally have been working on some other projects, but I
can get to that soon.

Here is my personal point of confusion about how punctuation levels
operate.

Speakup has punctuation levels and so do synths.  The ltlk family for
example have 16 punctuation levels to speakup's 3.  Both levels can
be set.  I guess the punc_level sys file sets the speakup punctuation
level and the ltlk/punct sys file sets the ltlk punctuation level.
When do we use the synth punctuation level?  Which level is controlled
by the keyboard?

William

Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[Bruce Noblick]

Hello all,

Please pardon me while I think out loud and hopefully come up with something 
coherent though I make no promises of that.

I can see advantages to keeping as much control of exception dictionaries 
within speakup.  If the synth is shared among other applications, speakup 
could be easily configured so that it would not be affected by other 
program's settings and speech produced by other programs would not be 
affected by its settings.

Synths will certainly come along with a long list of features that are 
useful for direct programming but unless the definitions can't be fairly 
standard, their usefulness can be limited.  In my opinion, a program like 
speakup works best if it can use a short list of common features especially 
where use of those features might affect other application's use of the 
device or interface.

I also vote for keeping the distributed content of this exception dictionary 
as small as possible, perhaps even having it empty and just providing a 
simple mechanism for placing items in it.  This would eliminate the need to 
maintain different exception dictionaries for a long list of hardware and 
software synths.  The only case I can make for distributing content is if 
there is a glaring flaw in a particular synth's text to speech algorithm.

In general, I don't like similar code being implemented in more than one 
place but in this case and if it is done correctly, it may allow the choice 
to be deferred to the user at run time which is a luxury I do like.

Thanks for allowing me to think out loud.  Now I will go back to what I do 
best: talking to myself, grin.

Enjoy!
Bruce




--------------------------------------------------
From: "Kirk Reiser" <kirk@braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 8:22 AM
To: "Speakup is a screen review system for Linux." <speakup@braille.uwo.ca>
Subject: Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

> Hey folks: I of course have an oppinion on all of this but am more
> interested in bringing a few issues up.  It is true that a lot of
> hardware synths provide exception handling rules for pronunciation but
> manipulating those rules is often not trivial.  The DoubleTalk family
> is an example.  You can have exceptions but you need to compile those
> exceptions extermally and then download them to the synth at start up.
> As far as I know there is no compiler available for the DoubleTalk
> family in gnu/linux.  Also, downloading firmware or exceptions adds
> another level of complication to synth initialization which can be
> frustrating as many DECTalk PC users can declare.  So, you will need
> to either make exception handling software available for all the
> hardware/software synths or leave folks basically in the same
> situation they are currently.  Even developing exception dictionaries
> for the various soft synths is not a trivial matter as anyone that has
> tried to make exceptions for espeak/espeakup will tell you.
> Fortunately, Jonathan has been very good at updating pronunciations
> when it's brought to his attention but what about the other soft
> synths like festival?  So although it may be theoretically more
> desirable to hand-off processing to the individual synths the
> implementation is a whole lot more involved than central processing
> one time at the speakup level for all synths even if each synth might
> need to be slightly different.
>
> As for levels of punctuation for console output versus reading mode it
> isn't really that confusing once you understand it and it was a
> feature request which was written because of users desires.  The code
> is already there so I don't quite understand the desire to remove the
> feature.  If there is confusion I believe it is a documentation lack
> and not a difficulty with the implementation.  I do aggree however
> that a direct synth mode should be available and I thought we had all
> decided that already.  If it hasn't exactly been implemented so far
> then it is more a problem of developers not following through than
> nondetermination to have the feature.  A toggle to turn processing on
> or off depending on users wish is a good idea but is not quite as easy
> to implement as one might think and that's why I suspect we're having
> this discussion.
>
> So those are my thoughts currently.
>   Kirk
>
> --
> Kirk Reiser The Computer Braille Facility
> e-mail: kirk@braille.uwo.ca University of Western Ontario
> phone: (519) 661-3061
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup@braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup 

Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[Steve Holmes]

After going through 19 messages on this thread, I tend to lean towards
keeping the processing in Speakup.  I need to point out something I
haven't heard even mentioned yet and that is with Capitalization.  The
theory behind speech dispatcher has always been for the synth to
control all punctuation and capitalization - fine.  But when you do
that and use speech dispatcher with espeak, you always get stuck with
that god-awful speaking of "Capital" before every capital letter.
Where Speakup and Orca's old gnome-speech services module can adjust
for pitch to indicate capitalization.  I know espeak supports pitch
change for upper case letters but I don't think the speech dispatcher
module for espeak does; I think that's the problem   Like I say,
speakup's current logic gets around what I feel to be a big problem.

Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing

[William Hubbs]

Hi Steve,

On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 11:23:44PM -0700, Steve Holmes wrote:
> After going through 19 messages on this thread, I tend to lean towards
> keeping the processing in Speakup.  I need to point out something I
> haven't heard even mentioned yet and that is with Capitalization.  The
> theory behind speech dispatcher has always been for the synth to
> control all punctuation and capitalization - fine.  But when you do
> that and use speech dispatcher with espeak, you always get stuck with
> that god-awful speaking of "Capital" before every capital letter.
> Where Speakup and Orca's old gnome-speech services module can adjust
> for pitch to indicate capitalization.  I know espeak supports pitch
> change for upper case letters but I don't think the speech dispatcher
> module for espeak does; I think that's the problem   Like I say,
> speakup's current logic gets around what I feel to be a big problem.

The capitalization processing is not handled by any synthesizers that I
know of other than espeak, so that is not going to be changed in
speakup.

William