[DECtalk] TEST
Alex H.
linuxx64.bashsh at gmail.com
Mon Jun 27 19:51:08 EDT 2011
OK, here's my thoughts on what's going on here:
I love the fact that we're able to make DECTalk sing, some people like
it just as a screen reader voice, or in the case of NWAA they use DT for
weather broadcasts. In short, dT is used for singing and non-singing
acts alike. It's important though to keep in mind that disabled people
who may not be able to sing need this to express their arts in music,
write songs and perform, etc. Removing it on the basis of saying 'it's
for screen readers' is inaccurate and, in my opinion, not necessary. As
you may or may not be aware, there's a non-classic version of SAPI DT
flying around in the Interwebs, and it's possible to use it with a
screen reader, and make it sing. So that argument is tosh, quite frankly.
I do think singing being enabled is important and don't really
understand why it's going to be disabled.
Also, let me clear something up, yet again (already stated above for any
doubts to be banished that this is possible), before it gets all tangled
and messy as is often the case with this sort of thing. It is possible
to get a DECTalk SAPI working with screen readers - most screen readers
support SAPI5 as an option so this isn't an issue. It is also possible
to have the same synth sing, or operate with other software not that of
the screen reader. For instance, Microsoft annah works with JAWS, NVDA,
and Window-Eyes, three screen readers. It also worsk with TTSApp.exe, an
external utility that sends text strings to SAPI5 voices using a simple
GUI interface. It's possible and has been happening for the invention of
SAIP4/SAPI5. So there.
I think somewhere down the line a developer/somebody or other is
thinking that it's one or the other - it sings or it gets used with
screen readers. It is possible to do both. That is, one could
hypothetically install the DT SAPI, use it with their favorite screen
reader, then turn around and pipe text directly into it using a utility
like TTSApp.exe. You usually wouldn't get a version of DECTalk to sing
using a screen reader, since these programs use an array of punctuation
filters and it's mostly a failed experiment. E.g., try putting phonemic
text into an email and read it with MobileSpeak on your smartphone. It
won't work, and will just spit back the text with all the brackets and
<> stuff spoken and phonemes will not be read properly.
In conclusion, it is possible to market a SAPI dectalk that sings and
satisfies the needs of screen reader users at the same time. There's no
special rocket science wankery which needs to be done or anything, if it
works with singing and can also speak text, and it's compliant with SAPI
standards, what exactly is the problem? I don't really know where the
confusion of having DECTalk sing and being operable with screen readers
came up. Do people seriously think that a version of DT that is being
used with screen readers means it can't sing? Such foolish thinking.
They're not even connected. Of course you should be able to pipe text
into a DT synth and have it come back singing as long as the punctuation
doesn't get all screwed up - see my comments above. Now, here's the
clincher. If somebody goes in and purposefully messes with the DT engine
and makes it so it cannot sing, regardless of parameters and input
methods, then of course it's not going to sing, and it's not true
DECTalk. If the damn synth supports it, make it happen. I'm tired of
this "features being disabled" crap. Just give me my synth for a decent
[low] price, let me do as I will with it, but for pete's sake don't
disable functions because of misfed information or assumptions without
checking on this list! After all, this is probably where a good chunk of
customers for this synth will hear about its status - through this list
and its members, and the word will spread, etc. If we get jerked around
and hear stuff is going to be intentionally disabled/be one voice/any
other trickery, it's not worth a CENT to me. Honestly, why, would, you,
do, more, work, for, yourself, when you don't need to! If the voices
work, if it's classic sounding, just sell it! Don't fiddle with it and
disable features for the heck of it.
Hopefully, I've repeated myself enough and walked circles around this
issue and clarified for the people in charge of this stuff that, once
again, you can sing and screenread with the same voice. Maybe not at the
same time, but it's posslbe quite easily.
Respectfully (but a little tired),
Faithful DECTalk User
On 6/27/2011 6:54 PM, Blake Roberts wrote:
> The majority of Dectalk users use Dectalk for singing, 90-95 percent.
> Singing is the primary reason most people use Dectalk these days. I
> know people on the Internet who love hearing Dectalk because of
> its singing ability, even though they have no desire to get a Dectalk
> product. Dectalk singing has been enjoyed by many people for years and
> still is. Making Dectalk sing was very important to Dennis Klat.
> Blake
> *From:* dectalk-bounces at bluegrasspals.com
> [mailto:dectalk-bounces at bluegrasspals.com] *On Behalf Of *FRIDO ORDEMANN
> *Sent:* Monday, June 27, 2011 6:34 PM
> *To:* DECtalk Discussions
> *Subject:* Re: [DECtalk] TEST
>
> There are other users of DECtalk than those who use it for singing.
>
> *From:* "Dectalk at aol.com" <Dectalk at aol.com>
> *To:* dectalk at bluegrasspals.com
> *Sent:* Mon, June 27, 2011 2:10:43 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [DECtalk] TEST
>
> *Actually I was scared I was removed for exploding on the list last
> night. I also find it odd that Corine never apologized for her
> misleading post. I'm still in total shock at how her post was
> worded. And to post that on the list when we all have a speak window
> or other form of Dectalk. Heck, if I did have a singing SAPI, why
> would anyone buy her non-singing version? *
> **
> *That post just totally made no sense to me. I still feel bad about
> my response, but I was and still am angry. *
> **
> **
> *SNOOPI BOTTEN *
> In a message dated 6/27/2011 1:22:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> linuxx64.bashsh at gmail.com writes:
>
> Your message came through. It's all good.
>
> Alex
>
> On 6/27/2011 12:58 PM, Dectalk at aol.com <mailto:Dectalk at aol.com>
> wrote:
>> My mail got too full, so I'm just making sure everything is ok.
>> **
>> *SNOOPI BOTTEN *
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> DECtalk mailing list
>> DECtalk at bluegrasspals.com <mailto:DECtalk at bluegrasspals.com>
>> http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk
>
>
> --
> Sent via Thunderbird.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> DECtalk mailing list
> DECtalk at bluegrasspals.com
> http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> DECtalk mailing list
> DECtalk at bluegrasspals.com
> http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk
--
Sent via Thunderbird.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://bluegrasspals.com/pipermail/dectalk/attachments/20110627/20a4db77/attachment.html>
More information about the Dectalk
mailing list