I don't understand the advantage an ASCII speech synthesizer has over a unicode speech synthesizer, or the advantage of having an intermediary between synthesizer and screen reader. Maybe I'm missing something, but I would think a hypothetical espeak-unicode that could work directly with Orca would work better than keeping espeak ignorant of unicode and requiring speech-dispatcher to translate unicode to something espeak understands. Honestly, the use of an intermediary and having the intermediary handle Unicode support sounds like the computer equivalent of telling someone they shouldn't learn a foreign language because they can just use Google Translate. Anyways, I personally think stringing Greak, Hebrew, Arabic, etc. into words instead of reading them as individual characters and actually being able to identify individual kanji and kana are more important as far as unicode support is concerned. Not that I know enough Hebrew or Arabic for their proper reading to tell me anything, but I stumble upon enough text in those alphabets that the slowdown to read letter-by-letter Orca does to be annoying, and it would be nice if I could make use of what little I remember from taking Japanese in high school. -- Sincerely, Jeffery Wright President Emeritus, Nu Nu Chapter, Phi Theta Kappa. Former Secretary, Student Government Association, College of the Albemarle. _______________________________________________ Blinux-list mailing list Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list