[jawsscripts] Re: Saying two messages with a specific period of silence in between
- From: "Matthew2007" <matthew2007@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <jawsscripts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:51:10 -0700
In my opinion your emotional reply seems to be a little over the top in
regards to a posting of an opinion. You're also redirecting, amplifying, and
answering some other question. Why not simply let the opinion go as
another's view on the matter.
Matthew
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Lee" <doug.lee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <jawsscripts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 11:59 AM
Subject: [jawsscripts] Re: Saying two messages with a specific period of
silence in between
> I'm frankly rather startled at the negative sentiments in this thread,
> and at the predictions in the message I'm answering. It's hard to
> answer the raised points within the list topic, but I can say this
> much: I've seen requested JAWS scripting features implemented
> occasionally without first seeing a personal response to a suggestion,
> so lack of email does not prove lack of attention. It's also true,
> though, that most products are driven more by end-user sentiments and
> needs than by developer needs, which means in the case of JAWS that
> scripting feature requests would often naturally land below
> user-visible feature requests in priority. It can be argued of
> course, and I've argued this myself, that scripting feature requests,
> at least good ones, should result in end-user features simply by
> making them more possible; but again, in a sufficiently large company,
> it is pretty normal for that viewpoint to be hard to sell.
>
> Last point: If you write and maintain scripts for a very popular
> program, like Winamp or Skype or somesuch, you probably know how
> it feels to get a lot of different feature requests at once. Each
> person will naturally feel his or her request is important, and if
> you don't get it done, that person will often feel ignored. The
> fact that you implemented 15 out of 20 requests in a short time
> does not change this, neither does the fact that you had no more
> time to use for implementing requests. There will be times when
> you receive a request, and you have three choices of what to do
> right then: Write a response to the request, implement the requested
> feature, or deal with a higher-priority item. This is a supply-and-demand
> problem of a sort, and it applies to JAWS itself, and its features,
> just as much as to a set of scripts one of us might maintain. I'm
> not surprised that the majority of users don't think of things this
> way, but I admit I'm a little surprised to see this view lost on a
> scripting list.
>
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 11:40:28AM -0700, Matthew2007 wrote:
> Yes, I agree on all points. From a business perspective its very, very
> poor
> form to ask for suggestions to improve on your product then completely
> ignore the suggestions. Not acknowledging a requested suggestion will lead
> to apathy on the suggestur/customer's behalf. The person sending the
> suggestion will e-mail their information and feel very disappointed if
> they
> spent so much time thinking of ways in which the product will benefit only
> to find they walk away feeling neglected and ultimately feeling bad affect
> towards the company. The result is the slow end to all user suggestions,
> which means the company will lose an avenue of user feedback and left to
> guess at what the "typical" user wants in a product. Its one thing to
> logically conclude that a product has shortcomings, but if emotion is the
> basis of a conclusion, it will take much more effort to turn the person
> around as, I dare say--and can prove, most people think with their
> emotions
> than with their minds though most people are under the impression of the
> opposite. You would think FS would know this basic human nature. Besides,
> how hard is it to send a type of simple form letter reply via e-mail? I'm
> telling you guys, unless they make some drastic obvious changes, I'd say
> they have maybe 7 or 8 years before they throw in the towel. I believe Ted
> Henter was smart to see that jaws had for the most part hit its zenith and
> got out with a fat check.
>
> Matthew
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jamal Mazrui" <empower@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <jawsscripts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 6:08 AM
> Subject: [jawsscripts] Re: Saying two messages with a specific period of
> silence in between
>
>
>>I suggested adding such a function, e.g., named IsJAWSSpeaking(), as well
>> as several other suggestions I collected from this list a year or so ago.
>> I sent the collection of scripting related suggestions to a few
>> different,
>> relevant contacts at FS. I received no response -- not even a polite but
>> non-substantive"thank you for your suggestions which we will consider
>> ..."
>> It was quite discouraging. Personally, I have found GW micro
>> management/developers to be much more responsive to feedback and
>> suggestions from scripters as they have been developing Window-Eyes 7.0.
>> I still value JAWS and find pros and cons between the two screen
>> readers. If FS does not start listening and responding to developers,
>> however, I think it will lose significant ground to the up and coming
>> competition.
>>
>> Jamal
>> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Geoff Chapman wrote:
>>
>>> Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 10:18:34 +1000
>>> From: Geoff Chapman <gch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Reply-To: jawsscripts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> To: jawsscripts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: [jawsscripts] Re: Saying two messages with a specific period of
>>> silence in between
>>>
>>> Wow, I'm seriously surprised jaws doesn't already include some
>>> logic/dece=
>> nt
>>> indexing functions like this doug. are you in constant communication
>>> with
>>> Erric and developers about this kind of thing? surely you guys are
>>> REALLY
>>> WHAT SHOULD BE DRIVING DEVELOPER AND MARKETING SCHEDULES AS REGARDS
>>> IMPROVEMENT TO THE JAWS ScreenReader in general ought not you?
>>>
>>> you are the ones that have the real knowledge of what stuff needs to be
>>> i=
>> n
>>> there to make what needs to happen, happen.
>>>
>>> From: "Doug Lee" <doug.lee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> To: <jawsscripts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 3:00 AM
>>> Subject: [jawsscripts] Re: Saying two messages with a specific period of
>>> silence in between
>>>
>>>
>>> > This is a very clever suggestion actually, and one I think I tried
>>> > once but forgot about. It may help, but I still doubt it will work as
>>> > well as you'd like. The SayAll process does not actually keep code
>>> > execution in precise sync with speech. You can stop SayAll on an
>>> > exact word, but this is actually done by retreating to that word
>>> > rather than literally catching JAWS in the act of saying it.
>>> >
>>> > The SayAll system does prove, however, that JAWS internally has enough
>>> > information to implement something like I suggested before, direct
>>> > access to synthesizer indexing functionality.
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 12:03:23PM -0400, Jamal Mazrui wrote:
>>> > This is a hack, but you can do a SayAll in the user buffer, and tell
>>> > when it completes with the SayAllStoppedEvent function. You could
>>> > either speak the second message within that function, or use that
>>> > event
>>> > handler to set a global variable indicating that a SayAll has stopped.
>>> > Your script would go into a While loop testing the global variable
>>> > before exiting.
>>> >
>>> > Jamal
>>> > On Sat, 12 Jul 2008, Kamil wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Return-Path: <jawsscripts-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> > > Received: from psmtp.com (exprod6mx197.postini.com [64.18.1.209])
>>> > > =3D09by smart.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id WAA01213
>>> > > =3D09for <empower@xxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 22:08:03 -0400
>>> > > Received: from source ([206.53.239.180]) by exprod6mx197.postini.com
>>> > > ([64.18.5.10]) with SMTP;
>>> > > =3D09Sat, 12 Jul 2008 21:07:52 CDT
>>> > > Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>>> > > =3D09by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex)
>>> > > wit=
>> h
>>> > > ESMTP id C59ED8C2B3D;
>>> > > =3D09Sat, 12 Jul 2008 22:07:52 -0400 (EDT)
>>> > > Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1])
>>> > > =3D09by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new,
>>> > > po=
>> rt
>>> 100=3D
>>> > 24)
>>> > > =3D09with ESMTP id 27403-10; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 22:07:52 -0400 (EDT)
>>> > > Received: from turing (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>>> > > =3D09by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex)
>>> > > wit=
>> h
>>> > > ESMTP id 401CF8C2B38;
>>> > > =3D09Sat, 12 Jul 2008 22:07:52 -0400 (EDT)
>>> > > Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list jawsscripts); Sat,
>>> > > 12 Jul 2008 22:07:17 -0400 (EDT)
>>> > > X-Original-To: jawsscripts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> > > Delivered-To: jawsscripts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> > > Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>>> > > =3D09by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex)
>>> > > wit=
>> h
>>> > > ESMTP id 120248C2B2E
>>> > > =3D09for <jawsscripts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 12 Jul 2008
>>> > > 22:07:17 -0400
>>> (EDT)
>>> > > Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1])
>>> > > =3D09by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new,
>>> > > po=
>> rt
>>> 100=3D
>>> > 24)
>>> > > =3D09with ESMTP id 27340-06 for <jawsscripts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
>>> > > =3D09Sat, 12 Jul 2008 22:07:17 -0400 (EDT)
>>> > > Received: from bay0-omc1-s40.bay0.hotmail.com
>>> > > (bay0-omc1-s40.bay0.hotmail.com [65.54.246.112])
>>> > > =3D09by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex)
>>> > > wit=
>> h
>>> > > ESMTP id ADD198C296D
>>> > > =3D09for <jawsscripts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 12 Jul 2008
>>> > > 22:07:16 -0400
>>> (EDT)
>>> > > Received: from hotmail.com ([10.6.6.17]) by
>>> > > bay0-omc1-s40.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft
>>> SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959);
>>> > > =3D09 Sat, 12 Jul 2008 19:07:15 -0700
>>> > > Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft
>>> SMTPSVC;
>>> > > =3D09 Sat, 12 Jul 2008 19:07:15 -0700
>>> > > Message-ID: <BLU138-DAV7719AB4CE7505F7580687A3920@xxxxxxx>
>>> > > Received: from 24.36.189.122 by BLU138-DAV7.phx.gbl with DAV;
>>> > > =3D09Sun, 13 Jul 2008 02:07:13 +0000
>>> > > X-Originating-IP: [24.36.189.122]
>>> > > X-Originating-Email: [kamilimak@xxxxxxxxxxx]
>>> > > X-Sender: kamilimak@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> > > From: "Kamil" <kamilimak@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> > > To: <jawsscripts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> > > References: <383613.43172.qm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> > > <BLU138-DAV28AC7A1A2C9E105EF76C8A3920@xxxxxxx>
>>> > > <1BAE72B02DC5425C878BA53146B147C8@DBrown07>
>>> > > <BLU138-DAV442E1DDC6B48388CAAB1DA3920@xxxxxxx>
>>> > > Subject: [jawsscripts] Saying two messages with a specific period of
>>> > > silence in between
>>> > > Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 22:11:01 -0400
>>> > > MIME-Version: 1.0
>>> > > Content-type: text/plain; charset=3D3Diso-8859-1
>>> > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>>> > > X-Priority: 3
>>> > > X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>>> > > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
>>> > > X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512
>>> > > X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Jul 2008 02:07:15.0563 (UTC)
>>> > > FILETIME=3D3D[2BC0B3B0:01C8E48D]
>>> > > X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at localhost.localdomain
>>> > > X-archive-position: 1972
>>> > > X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
>>> > > Sender: jawsscripts-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> > > Errors-to: jawsscripts-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> > > X-original-sender: kamilimak@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> > > Precedence: normal
>>> > > Reply-to: jawsscripts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> > > List-help: <mailto:ecartis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=3D3Dhelp>
>>> > > List-unsubscribe:
>>> <jawsscripts-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=3D3Dunsubscrib=3D
>>> > e>
>>> > > List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
>>> > > List-Id: jawsscripts <jawsscripts.freelists.org>
>>> > > X-List-ID: jawsscripts <jawsscripts.freelists.org>
>>> > > List-subscribe:
>>> > > <jawsscripts-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=3D3Dsubscr=
>> ibe>
>>> > > List-owner: <mailto:rharmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> > > List-post: <mailto:jawsscripts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> > > List-archive: <//www.freelists.org/archives/jawsscripts>
>>> > > X-list: jawsscripts
>>> > > X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at localhost.localdomain
>>> > > X-pstn-neptune: 3/1/0.33/35
>>> > > X-pstn-levels: (S:82.81490/99.90000 CV:99.0000 R:95.9108 P:95.9108
>>> > > M:97.0282 C:98.6951 )
>>> > > X-pstn-settings: 5 (2.0000:2.0000) s cv gt3 gt2 gt1 r p m c
>>> > > X-pstn-addresses: from <kamilimak@xxxxxxxxxxx> [db-null]
>>> > > X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3D3D0.0 required=3D3D5.0 tests=3D3D version=
>> =3D3D2.20
>>> > > X-Spam-Level:
>>> > >
>>> > > Hi folks,
>>> > >
>>> > > I would like JAWS to say two messages with exactly two-second
>>> > > silence=
>> in
>>> > > between.
>>> > > Neither Delay (20), nor twenty Pause () commands works,
>>> > > since both starts right after the first message is sent to the TTS,
>>> > > n=
>> ot
>>> w=3D
>>> > hen
>>> > > it's completely spoken.
>>> > > I tried counting number of words in the first message,
>>> > > and calculating the time needed for it to be completely spoken using
>>> > > =
>> the
>>> > > current speech rate.
>>> > > The result varies based on the total number of sylabels in the
>>> > > messag=
>> e.
>>> > >
>>> > > Can you think of a better solution?
>>> > > As far as I know, there is no function such as TtsIsDoneEvent or
>>> IsTtsBus=3D
>>> > y.
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks,
>>> > >
>>> > > Camille
>>> > >
>>> > > __________=3DA0
>>> > > View the list's information and change your settings at
>>> > > //www.freelists.org/list/jawsscripts
>>> > >
>>> > __________?
>>> > View the list's information and change your settings at
>>> > //www.freelists.org/list/jawsscripts
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Doug Lee, Senior Accessibility Programmer
>>> > SSB BART Group - Accessibility-on-Demand
>>> > mailto:doug.lee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.ssbbartgroup.com
>>> > "While they were saying among themselves it cannot be done,
>>> > it was done." --Helen Keller
>>> > __________
>>> > View the list's information and change your settings at
>>> > //www.freelists.org/list/jawsscripts
>>> >
>>>
>>> __________=A0
>>> View the list's information and change your settings at
>>> //www.freelists.org/list/jawsscripts
>>>
>> __________
>> View the list's information and change your settings at
>> //www.freelists.org/list/jawsscripts
>>
>>
>>
>> __________ NOD32 3269 (20080715) Information __________
>>
>> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
>> http://www.eset.com
>>
>>
>
> __________?
> View the list's information and change your settings at
> //www.freelists.org/list/jawsscripts
>
> --
> Doug Lee, Senior Accessibility Programmer
> SSB BART Group - Accessibility-on-Demand
> mailto:doug.lee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.ssbbartgroup.com
> "While they were saying among themselves it cannot be done,
> it was done." --Helen Keller
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at
> //www.freelists.org/list/jawsscripts
>
>
> __________ NOD32 3269 (20080715) Information __________
>
> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at
//www.freelists.org/list/jawsscripts
Other related posts:
