From owner-freebsd-questions  Fri Nov  8 11:33:38 1996
Return-Path: owner-questions
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA03224
          for questions-outgoing; Fri, 8 Nov 1996 11:33:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from seagull.rtd.com (seagull.rtd.com [198.102.68.2])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA03219
          for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Fri, 8 Nov 1996 11:33:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from dgy@localhost) by seagull.rtd.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA16886; Fri, 8 Nov 1996 12:32:11 -0700 (MST)
From: Don Yuniskis <dgy@rtd.com>
Message-Id: <199611081932.MAA16886@seagull.rtd.com>
Subject: Re: speech for the blind and freebsd.
To: bill@twwells.com (T. William Wells)
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 1996 12:32:11 -0700 (MST)
Cc: dgy@rtd.com, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <m0vLwVr-0001DRC@twwells.com> from "T. William Wells" at Nov 8, 96 02:22:47 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > Well, I suspect you *could* use pty's -- but it would require a
> > much more sophisticated *user* interface.  You need to be able to
> > walk from word to word, line to line, spell, etc.
> >
> > It's not a trivial problem...
> 
> Huh? That's exactly why you *don't* want it in the kernel!  Such

Sorry, I wasn't advocating putting it into the kernel  :>  I was
just commenting on the (admittedly simplistic) pipe into rsynth!

> complexities belong in userland.  You build a program that's like
> "screen", except that its purpose isn't (necessarily) to manage
> multiple screens but is rather to manage a single screen, while
> providing audible feedback, and give the user the ability to
> manipulate the screen as necessary.....

Yes.

> (BTW, I'm legally blind, though the only "special equipment" I
> need is a chair with enough back support that when I shove my
> face near the screen the stresses on my back are minimized. :-)

Yes, "visually impaired" and "legally blind" are quite all-encompassing
terms.

(BTW, I worked on the initial KRM in mid 70's...)

--don