[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Accessibility] Call to Arms

From: Eric S. Johansson
Subject: Re: [Accessibility] Call to Arms
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 14:11:02 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100713 Thunderbird/3.1.1

 On 7/25/2010 10:52 PM, Richard Stallman wrote:
     >  I agree that using NaturallySpeaking on Wine is less bad than using it
     >  on Windows.  But this is not a step on the path to replacing
     >  NaturallySpeaking, thus, for us to do this would be a detour.

     That's a valid argument if you can deliver a NaturallySpeaking equivalent
     application engine in 6 to 12 months.

No, it is just the opposite.  If we were likely to have that
equivalent ready in a year, we could start developing things now to
use it.  We could release them in anticipation of the platform they
would run on, and never mind that people would actually run them on a
user-subjugating platform for now, because they would look forward to
switching to our free platform.

But since we cannot have the free replacement soon, this would mean
developing programs that would, for the foreseeable future, only run
on proprietary platforms.  We cannot even recommend such programs to
people, let alone release them.
you have the development path for speech recognition somewhat mixed up. You don't let the recognition engine dictate the API. The API is dictated by by what the applications need to do. Yes, there is some mixing in both directions but, for the most part you start from the application hence my assertion that you can use NaturallySpeakingg as an interim solution. if the opposite was the case then, of course I would support your appproach.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]