Howdy,
Emacspeak--http://emacspeak.sf.net--is already a way to speech interface
with Emacs. It does work with Emacs W3, which does lack some features, I
admit. But, nevertheless, it does exist and does work.
Another option that I heard recently mentioned on another list was FireVox.
(I can't remember the URL off hand, but do a Google search for FireVox, and
you'll find it. A bit of trouble to set up, but it's dueable, and does
handle a lot of web browsing needs.)
I personally like Emacspeak--at least so far--but am open to new ideas as
well. The way I see it, subverting the way existing applications work--or
for instance controling X from the console--isn't really the way to go.
Orca and the like should be encouraged to keep going, because the way I see
things it's only a matter of time before those efforts succeed.
Respectfully yours, and hope this helps some,
Zack.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Moore" <christopher.h.moore@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 8:36 AM
Subject: speakup desktop again
> Hello,
> I saw this topic on the speakup list recently and followed the
> discussion with interest.
>
> I'd classify myself as a happy linux user. When I was working I more or
> less had to use windows to conform to the culture of my employer. Even
> if linux alternatives were available, convincing the IT staff that
> accessing their network with "non-standard" software would somehow
> compromise their security would not have been
> an easy task. Now that I am retired, I find that the linux text console
> satisfies most of my computer needs except for web browsing. So I still
> need to boot up the ms windows to access some web pages when I need to
> order something online or listen to audio streams.
>
> While reading this discussion, it occurred to me that we already have a
> text-based desktop environment in the form of emacs. What emacs lacks
> is an up-to-date web browser. While I've read comments on the w3
> browser, most of them are not favorable. What emacs does have, however,
> is buffers and robust editing features. If, there were a way to say,
> run firefox in a X session and control it from an emacs environment,
> would this not fill the gap?
>
> Let me take this a step further. We're all aware of the effort to make
> the gnome desktop accessible. This is a major undertaking and involves
> retooling many applications to use the gtk+ archa tecture to expose
> their contents. It further involves developing screen readers to
> retrieve this information and speak it in some usable format. To-date I
> am aware of three such screen readers: gnopernicus, orca and lsr. Work
> on the first appears to have stopped while work on the latter two is
> still underway.
>
> This brings me back to the emacs environment. Much of the work on the
> above screen readers centers on developing speech and braille output
> facilities. Orca for example, has an on-screen dialog for
> modifying speech, braille an magnification parameters. If the screen
> readers were designed to communicate with emacs, the spoken content
> would appear in an emacs buffer and the applications could be controlled
> from a text console. If this approach had been taken, all the effort
> put into developing the braille and speech facilities would have been
> unnecessary.
>
> I'm looking for volunteers to investigate the prospect of
> communicating
> with X applications from a console environment. While it would be nice
> to use the entire gnome desktop, my initial focus would probably on web
> browsing since there is a definite gap in this area.
>
> Feel free to comment on the speakup list or to me directly. If such a
> group were to be be formed it would probably make sense to start a
> separate mailing list or other vehicle for sharing ideas.
>
> Chris
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
