Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: plugins
From: Jack <jack_at_sylviawebster.f2s.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 10:52:32 +0100
Here is how I could imagine it:
A string bank of phrases is stored in the .rock file as a resource
A program, on the computer, looks through all these .rock's and creates
a file for each one.
The file would be named after a hash of the phrase and they'd all be
stored in the same directory.
When a plugin asks for a phrase, hashes (pre-compile time or run time)
the phrase and plays that MP3 file.
1. It would be easy to keep the MP3 files in one place
2. You could download a whole premade directory if you wish to use voice
features but don't wish to make the voices yourself
3. It wouldn't add to the rock files (You could have the MP3s and the
4. If there are two phases the same, only one would exist, because
they'd hash into the same string
5. No individual files to carry around for the Voice features - all the
data needed to create them is in the rock.
...But then I don't do this type of programming :)
On Fri, 2004-06-18 at 17:10, Cristian wrote:
> Joerg 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 sor!
> 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.
> Bye, Cris.
> 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