[DECtalk] TEST

Dectalk at aol.com Dectalk at aol.com
Mon Jun 27 22:12:28 EDT 2011 

One other thing.  Enable Rehab.  Think about  the name, Enable Rehab.  I 
have a good question, what is enabling about  Enable, when they want to 
disable the singing in Dectalk?  Do that, and  Dectalk will need rehab.
 
And no, I'm not trying to be funny.  ENABLE WANTS  TO DISABLE SINGING.  
it's just wrong.
 
 
SNOOPI BOTTEN 
 
 
In a message dated 6/27/2011 8:57:58 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
beroberts at hughes.net writes:

I agree 100% with both Alex's and Snoopi's comments. Dectalk  SAPI needs to 
both sing and screen-read for some very important  reasons.
 
First,  when a new version of Windows comes out, it is possible the Speak 
windows will no longer work. If/when that happens, everyone who makes Dectalk 
sing wil experience a tragedy. Second, all Dectalk users with any 
disability will  have equal access to the synth functionality for years to come. 
Finally,  limiting functionality in Dectalk SAPI by disabling access to some  
parameters will mean Dectalk can no longer act. I made a multi-voice skit  
years ago in which parameters in the speak window were modified to make new  
voices. In one segment, I had Betty tell a story. I changed her head size and  
changed her voice to sound like the characters, both a little girl and  her 
mother. In other words, I turned one voice into  three.
 
In conclusion, the Dectalk  SAPI needs to have all the functionality 
available within the Speak  windows so that everyone can sing, act and do whatever 
they wish both now and  for decades to come.
Blake
 
 


 
____________________________________
 From: dectalk-bounces at bluegrasspals.com  
[mailto:dectalk-bounces at bluegrasspals.com] On Behalf Of Alex  H.
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2011 7:51 PM
To:  dectalk at bluegrasspals.com
Subject: Re: [DECtalk]  TEST



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 i
naccurate  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)   [_mailto: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"_ (mailto:Dectalk at aol.com)  _<Dectalk at aol.com>_ 
(mailto:Dectalk at aol.com) 
To:  _dectalk at bluegrasspals.com_ (mailto: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_ (mailto: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_ 
(http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk) 




-- 
Sent via  Thunderbird.


_______________________________________________
DECtalk  mailing list
_DECtalk at bluegrasspals.com_ (mailto:DECtalk at bluegrasspals.com) 
_http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk_ 
(http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk) 







_______________________________________________

DECtalk mailing list

_DECtalk at bluegrasspals.com_ (mailto:DECtalk at bluegrasspals.com) 

_http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk_ 
(http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk) 




-- 
Sent via  Thunderbird.


_______________________________________________
DECtalk  mailing  list
DECtalk at bluegrasspals.com
http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/dectalk

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://bluegrasspals.com/pipermail/dectalk/attachments/20110627/00c942ed/attachment.html>

More information about the Dectalk mailing list