Sonar GNU/Linux merges with Vinux
Linux for blind general discussion
blinux-list at redhat.com
Thu Apr 27 16:34:47 UTC 2017
Sure, but if eSpeak cannot read Emoji and such, and we want new users to
use the web, they’ll quickly see that as "just another thing to
file a bug about and hope some one will fix it." Although,
people on the audio games forum are getting into Linux, and
don’t seem to care too much about emoji, so maybe I’m just
worrying about the "popular" blind kid crowd too much.
Sent from Discordia using Gnus for Emacs.
Email: r.d.t.prater at gmail.com
Long days and pleasant nights!
Linux for blind general discussion <blinux-list at redhat.com> writes:
> According to r.d.t.prater:
> # Otherwise, they’ll turn back to iOS, and Voiceover,
> # which can speak Emoji and such, pretty quickly.
> Not quite. I happen to know that Android and Google's speech
> synthesizer can speak emojis as well, and has had such capability for
> some time. On my Android devices, I do still use Google's speech
> synthesizer because it's the only one so far that speaks them, so I am
> able to emoji with the best, or the worst of them as it were. At this
> point, I still run the older Android Espeak on my devices, as there
> has been no espeak-ng update as of now. But I use Google mostly,
> because I feel like I'm missing something because the newer version
> isn't yet available, and even it doesn't fully support unicode yet.
> Does that mean that I will give up on Espeak ever getting full unicode
> support, especially for emojis? Hell no. And Emacs is far too
> convoluted for me to try to learn now, especially since it hasn't
> changed much since the first time I tried it many years ago, and now
> just getting Emacspeak to build is more trouble than it's worth.
> Seriously, it's all this talk of terminals and shells and Emacs and
> Vim that will drive new users away from Linux more than the lack of
> emoji support in Espeak. There is this perception in the wider world
> that Linux is all about these terminals and shells and editors that
> try to be so much more than just editors, and that it's only good for
> geeky types and server administrators. This glaring misconception has
> indeed been fed by the likes of Microsoft and other major marketing
> firms, who long ago relegated Linux to the data center and continue to
> tell the general public that it's just not for them. But many of us
> who use Linux every day also help to spread this false perception when
> we can't have a user friendly discussion of desktop Linux, because
> even when we install it for others, we can't seem to get past the
> terminal, the shell, the editor that tries to be and do too much, etc.
> Sorry, trying to get the general public at large to use Emacs will
> never fly, as it just feeds that geek perception of Linux and does
> nothing to make it more productive for the end user. Of course I'm not
> saying that you shouldn't use Emacspeak if you got it to build and it
> works for you. But I am saying that in order to debunk the myth that
> Linux is somehow inferior or is only for the geekiest, we need to
> start thinking more inclusively. This means thinking of the power user
> stuff like the shells and terminals and supereditors as an extension
> of the desktop, rather than thinking of the desktop as a necessary
> evil that we need to use to browse the web.
> Blinux-list mailing list
> Blinux-list at redhat.com
More information about the Blinux-list