Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: plugins
From: BlueChip <cs_bluechip_at_webtribe.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 02:56:55 +0100
First off, let it be said from the horses mouth that I got speech going in
my audio plugin with a botch. I did NOT port the speech system over to
There are a number of technical issues which need to be raised before the
speech system can be opened to the plugins in a way which will be of LONG
TERM help. There's no point in getting it wrong three times - it will
come, give it time :)
For one, I patched-together everything I needed out of samples that were
already available, adding more is currently out of the question. I would
propose that on a more generic scale, each plugin have it's own speech
file, as well as access to the core speech-lib ...which in itself causes
certain memory issues ...and so the wheel turns again.
My intention is to wait until Rockbox has full plugin speech support (and I
feel it is likely to happen) and then change Audio-3587 to suit that ...not
the other way around.
As for the next release of Audio-3587, very sorry about the delay - it has
been hell here.
I have had to simultaneously work on the new graphics lib, A rapidly
changing UISim, repair the broken devkit (rebuild form scratch), fix bugs
in audio-3587, not to mention "have a life" in the gaps in-between ;)
I anticipate the beta-2 release of Audio-3587 "any day now" ...but then
I've been thinking that for about a week now - LOL
At 17:10 18/06/04, you wrote:
> >(forgive me, I don't want to spark another flamewar)
>Sorry, this was not my intent, as person and as blind I think that any
>additional feature is welcome, voice is for us necessary to be able to use
>all the features. Your first vocal interface, is great, I think that the
>audio capabilityes of the BC audio plugin are also very nice, for the
>moment being I find it a nice idea to include blind support there,
>if, however, a more organized and predictible structure or architecture
>could be implemented for speech output enabled plugins, as you
>where suggesting Joerg, I think it would be even better, I hope that we
>can get there, if any plugin has its own vocal file, let's say a
>audio.voice file, and the plugin could use the core components to speak,
>I think it would be OK, since it would give all the plugin's developers
>the freedom to make it vocal or not, and to make a suited vocal output
>for the plugins. If the voices in the end are not consistent, I mean the
>type of voice, I wouldn't care, important is that a sort !
>ov speech output is there. Plus, vocalizing all the plugins to me doesn't
>make much sense, since I think that only a couple could be beneficial to
>us, and I don't think that vocalized plugins could meet the need of
>sighted people, not even while driving. As for the audio plugin, I think
>it can improve the quality of the audio under certain circumstances and
>if Bluechip could help to integrate it in the normal firmware, I think
>that it would be nice, although, I personally appreciate that it is
>a rather advanced tweaking interface, and that perhaps it should be put
>under a rather hidden submenue.
>Hope this helps, just a modest opinion of a user, whose intent is not to
>spark anything, just to help to make the project grow.
>Bye, and thanks again to all developers.
>In the mean while, a question to BC: is there a ucl file for your modifyed
>version? and, I think I wrote it before, is it possible to update the
>vocal interface so as to read _talk files? I could use the normal flashed
>version, and when I need the plugin I could rolo to your firmware, but at
>the moment, the folders are nolonger read.
>it follows your original message.
> >Bluechip hacked the plugin interface and a few other points of the core to
> >force his audio control in. This gives quick success, an incompatible fork,
> >but worst of all a badly maintainable architecture. The latter not being a
> >virtue in itself, but we can't let loose completely.
> >Exporting the talk API has issues. Plugins could "re-use" the existing
> >vocabulary, but we certainly don't want to extend that for the superset of
> >all possible plugins. Same goes for language IDs and localization. For
> >talking, what's required is a way for the plugins to bring in smaller
> >"sub-voicefiles" with their vocabulary extension. Remaining problem is how
> >to have that more or less consistant, you may have different speakers then.
> >In general, first we have to build the infrastructure, then the features.
> >+++ Jetzt WLAN-Router für alle DSL-Einsteiger und Wechsler +++
> >GMX DSL-Powertarife zudem 3 Monate gratis* http://www.gmx.net/dsl
Received on 2004-06-19