Re: [gnuspeech-contact] Re: Thoughts on GNUSpeech and possible accessibility applications

[David Hill]

Hi Jason,

On Apr 7, 2009, at 9:06 PM, Jason White wrote:

> David Hill <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> > You may be interested to check out the paper that describes the  
> > "Touch 'n
> > Talk" system that Dalmazio mentioned in an earlier email.  The direct
> > link is:
> >
> > http://pages.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/~hill/papers/ieee-touch-n-talk-1988.pdf
> >
> > it is an item on my university web site to which you can also  
> > navigate.
>
> Thank you, David, for the reference. This is an interesting paper.  
> It also
> reminds me of a related solution, developed at approximately the  
> same time, by
> Jim Thatcher for IBM Screen Reader, in which a separate key pad was  
> used for
> reading and navigational functions. Although I never had an  
> opportunity to use
> it, I recall that one of the principal difficulties in the early  
> versions was
> said to be that the system wouldn't automatically read new text  
> presented on
> screen, or read text in response to cursor movement - the users had  
> to switch
> frequently between the qwerty keyboard and the screen reader's key  
> pad while
> interacting with the application software.

This was not a limitation with Touch-'n-Talk which was designed to  
integrate control and access within a single haptic-auditory  
interface in as natural a way as possible.  We made a direct  
comparison between our system and a conventional key-operated talking  
terminal and our target population of blind users preferred the  
"Touch-'n-Talk" system, and the results for all users (there were  
five blind subjects and twelve sighted but blindfolded subjects) were  
comparable, which was a useful result since it implies that tests  
using blindfolded subjects can be used, at least in exploratory  
evaluations.

> The research in which I, personally, find the most insight is that  
> by T.V.
> Raman, first in his AsteR software (Audio System for Technical  
> Readings:
> http://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/raman/) and then in Emacspeak
> (http://emacspeak.sourceforge.net/ and for the latest source code,
> http://emacspeak.googlecode.com/).

I checked out some of Dr. Raman's examples -- apparently using  
DECTalk.  Audio formatting has the advantage that no special  
equipment is required.

But imagine if you could access those mathematical formulae by using  
your finger, and being able to feel the spatial relationships between  
the components with your hand and fingers, checking individual  
characters and manipulating a mark as well as a cursor.  "Touch-'n- 
Talk was deliberately designed to make spatial cues available with  
the need for sight, and to allow bookmarks, words, paragraphs, pages,  
spelling, searching and so on to be handled easily.

> Emacspeak works best with synthesizers that allow changes to be made
> dynamically to voice characteristics, for example the DECTalk, and  
> it would be
> interesting to know whether GNUSpeech might eventually support such  
> audio
> formatting techniques.

Having an articulatory synthesiser means that many different voices  
can be created dynamically, from child voices through female, to  
male.  Having said that, not all voice characteristics are well  
understood, and not just for excellent female voices.

> Further, in his latest work at Google on the accessibility of mobile
> telephones, Raman has devised a means of making touch screen input  
> achievable
> in an "eyes-free" context.

Being not just "eyes-free" but providing equivalent facilities using  
touch and sound were basic design criteria for "Touch-'n-Talk" as you  
obviously realise from reading the paper.


> I trust that this digression into speech interface research is not  
> unwelcome
> on the list; to ensure that it remains on topic, I have sought to  
> connect it
> to functional requirements of a text to speech system.
>
> I think there is a need for a free (as in freedom) tts system  
> capable of
> supporting the products of past and current speech interface  
> research, while,
> just as importantly, providing opportunities for future research  
> and free
> software development efforts.
>
> I also agree with David's observation that many of the most important
> requirements are already treated in his 1988 paper, although  
> advances such as
> Raman's "audio formatting" techniques create additional, desirable  
> features.

I am not sure what was missing compared to Raman's approach.  If you  
have spatial references through touch, the changing pitch is more of  
a distraction that a help, IMHO.

Warm regards.

david

-------------