* rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing
@ William Hubbs
` Tyler Littlefield
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 21+ messages in thread
From: William Hubbs @ UTC (permalink / raw)
To: speakup mailing list
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing William Hubbs @ ` Tyler Littlefield ` William Hubbs ` Gregory Nowak ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Tyler Littlefield @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` Tyler Littlefield @ ` William Hubbs ` Tyler Littlefield ` Chris Brannon 0 siblings, 2 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: William Hubbs @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` William Hubbs @ ` Tyler Littlefield ` Chris Brannon 1 sibling, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: Tyler Littlefield @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` William Hubbs ` Tyler Littlefield @ ` Chris Brannon 1 sibling, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: Chris Brannon @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing William Hubbs ` Tyler Littlefield @ ` Gregory Nowak ` William Hubbs ` Willem van der Walt ` Gaijin 3 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Gregory Nowak @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. -----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----- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` Gregory Nowak @ ` William Hubbs ` Alex H. ` Gregory Nowak 0 siblings, 2 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: William Hubbs @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` William Hubbs @ ` Alex H. ` William Hubbs ` Gregory Nowak 1 sibling, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Alex H. @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. 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 > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` Alex H. @ ` William Hubbs ` Hart Larry ` covici 0 siblings, 2 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: William Hubbs @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` William Hubbs @ ` Hart Larry ` William Hubbs ` covici 1 sibling, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Hart Larry @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` Hart Larry @ ` William Hubbs 0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: William Hubbs @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` William Hubbs ` Hart Larry @ ` covici 1 sibling, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: covici @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` William Hubbs ` Alex H. @ ` Gregory Nowak ` Jason White 1 sibling, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Gregory Nowak @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. -----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----- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` Gregory Nowak @ ` Jason White 0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: Jason White @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: speakup 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. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing William Hubbs ` Tyler Littlefield ` Gregory Nowak @ ` Willem van der Walt ` Kirk Reiser ` Gaijin 3 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Willem van der Walt @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. 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. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` Willem van der Walt @ ` Kirk Reiser ` Fwd: " William Hubbs ` Bruce Noblick 0 siblings, 2 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: Kirk Reiser @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Fwd: Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` Kirk Reiser @ ` William Hubbs ` Bruce Noblick 1 sibling, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: William Hubbs @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: speakup mailing list 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` Kirk Reiser ` Fwd: " William Hubbs @ ` Bruce Noblick 1 sibling, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: Bruce Noblick @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing William Hubbs ` (2 preceding siblings ...) ` Willem van der Walt @ ` Gaijin ` Steve Holmes 3 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Gaijin @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` Gaijin @ ` Steve Holmes ` William Hubbs 0 siblings, 1 reply; 21+ messages in thread From: Steve Holmes @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: speakup 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. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
* Re: rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing ` Steve Holmes @ ` William Hubbs 0 siblings, 0 replies; 21+ messages in thread From: William Hubbs @ UTC (permalink / raw) To: Speakup is a screen review system for Linux. 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 21+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~ UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
rfc: speakup's character and punctuation processing William Hubbs
` Tyler Littlefield
` William Hubbs
` Tyler Littlefield
` Chris Brannon
` Gregory Nowak
` William Hubbs
` Alex H.
` William Hubbs
` Hart Larry
` William Hubbs
` covici
` Gregory Nowak
` Jason White
` Willem van der Walt
` Kirk Reiser
` Fwd: " William Hubbs
` Bruce Noblick
` Gaijin
` Steve Holmes
` William Hubbs
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).