Re: [Sugar-devel] SpellCheck for write activity project
Noted. I will go ahead with speak On Sun, Apr 7, 2019, 1:31 PM Lionel Laské wrote: > > Hi Jake, > > Didn't know Talkify but Talkify seems to rely on a backend. > Because not all our users have access to Internet (or even to a server), > my preference is to use JavaScript libraries that could work offline. > It's why Speak is better thought its quality is worse than Talkify. > > Regards. > >Lionel. > > Le sam. 6 avr. 2019 à 10:48, a > écrit : > >> >> Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2019 12:34:56 +0530 >> From: Jake Scarlet >> To: James Cameron >> Cc: sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org >> Subject: Re: [Sugar-devel] SpellCheck for write activity project >> Message-ID: >> < >> calj6_ukt-ot7r4qnm6u_ldoitx-gfdjr9t0yh7j89qv0gzv...@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> I tested the API from Speak activity. It's fine but I personally found >> https://github.com/Hagsten/Talkify to be a better option. I could also >> tweak the voice a bit to make it sound like Alice from the Python version >> of write, I've looked into the licencing and all. >> So should I use this or the one in Speak activity? >> >> On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 at 04:33, James Cameron wrote: >> >> > Look for any APIs used now in Sugarizer for text to speech, and use >> > the same? >> > >> > On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 05:59:50AM +1400, Jake Scarlet wrote: >> > > Ah yes James, that's exactly what I meant to ask. Thank you all for >> your >> > > feedback. >> > > The project idea mentions that We can use an existing API based text >> > editor for >> > > the base. I've decided to go with QuillJS (one of the mentioned >> options), >> > > mainly for the flexibility and the fact that It can be optimized to >> > such great >> > > extent. Since it isn't confined inside an iframe like many other >> legacy >> > > editors that i came across, I can tailor it to perfectly match the >> > Sugarizer >> > > environment.Also, the lack of any dependencies makes up for a lot of >> > > simplicity. >> > > I've tested the basic functionalities and they all match up to the >> > original >> > > python version of the Write application. >> > > >> > > Should I proceed with this? >> > > And also, what API would you recommend for the text to speech feature, >> > referred >> > > to as Alice in the python version? >> > >> > -- >> > James Cameron >> > http://quozl.netrek.org/ >> > ___ >> > Sugar-devel mailing list >> > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org >> > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel >> > >> >> > ___ > Sugar-devel mailing list > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] SpellCheck for write activity project
Hi Jake, Didn't know Talkify but Talkify seems to rely on a backend. Because not all our users have access to Internet (or even to a server), my preference is to use JavaScript libraries that could work offline. It's why Speak is better thought its quality is worse than Talkify. Regards. Lionel. Le sam. 6 avr. 2019 à 10:48, a écrit : > > Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2019 12:34:56 +0530 > From: Jake Scarlet > To: James Cameron > Cc: sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > Subject: Re: [Sugar-devel] SpellCheck for write activity project > Message-ID: > < > calj6_ukt-ot7r4qnm6u_ldoitx-gfdjr9t0yh7j89qv0gzv...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > I tested the API from Speak activity. It's fine but I personally found > https://github.com/Hagsten/Talkify to be a better option. I could also > tweak the voice a bit to make it sound like Alice from the Python version > of write, I've looked into the licencing and all. > So should I use this or the one in Speak activity? > > On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 at 04:33, James Cameron wrote: > > > Look for any APIs used now in Sugarizer for text to speech, and use > > the same? > > > > On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 05:59:50AM +1400, Jake Scarlet wrote: > > > Ah yes James, that's exactly what I meant to ask. Thank you all for > your > > > feedback. > > > The project idea mentions that We can use an existing API based text > > editor for > > > the base. I've decided to go with QuillJS (one of the mentioned > options), > > > mainly for the flexibility and the fact that It can be optimized to > > such great > > > extent. Since it isn't confined inside an iframe like many other legacy > > > editors that i came across, I can tailor it to perfectly match the > > Sugarizer > > > environment.Also, the lack of any dependencies makes up for a lot of > > > simplicity. > > > I've tested the basic functionalities and they all match up to the > > original > > > python version of the Write application. > > > > > > Should I proceed with this? > > > And also, what API would you recommend for the text to speech feature, > > referred > > > to as Alice in the python version? > > > > -- > > James Cameron > > http://quozl.netrek.org/ > > ___ > > Sugar-devel mailing list > > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > > > > ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] SpellCheck for write activity project
I tested the API from Speak activity. It's fine but I personally found https://github.com/Hagsten/Talkify to be a better option. I could also tweak the voice a bit to make it sound like Alice from the Python version of write, I've looked into the licencing and all. So should I use this or the one in Speak activity? On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 at 04:33, James Cameron wrote: > Look for any APIs used now in Sugarizer for text to speech, and use > the same? > > On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 05:59:50AM +1400, Jake Scarlet wrote: > > Ah yes James, that's exactly what I meant to ask. Thank you all for your > > feedback. > > The project idea mentions that We can use an existing API based text > editor for > > the base. I've decided to go with QuillJS (one of the mentioned options), > > mainly for the flexibility and the fact that It can be optimized to > such great > > extent. Since it isn't confined inside an iframe like many other legacy > > editors that i came across, I can tailor it to perfectly match the > Sugarizer > > environment.Also, the lack of any dependencies makes up for a lot of > > simplicity. > > I've tested the basic functionalities and they all match up to the > original > > python version of the Write application. > > > > Should I proceed with this? > > And also, what API would you recommend for the text to speech feature, > referred > > to as Alice in the python version? > > -- > James Cameron > http://quozl.netrek.org/ > ___ > Sugar-devel mailing list > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] SpellCheck for write activity project
Look for any APIs used now in Sugarizer for text to speech, and use the same? On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 05:59:50AM +1400, Jake Scarlet wrote: > Ah yes James, that's exactly what I meant to ask. Thank you all for your > feedback. > The project idea mentions that We can use an existing API based text editor > for > the base. I've decided to go with QuillJS (one of the mentioned options), > mainly for the flexibility and the fact that It can be optimized to such > great > extent. Since it isn't confined inside an iframe like many other legacy > editors that i came across, I can tailor it to perfectly match the Sugarizer > environment.Also, the lack of any dependencies makes up for a lot of > simplicity. > I've tested the basic functionalities and they all match up to the original > python version of the Write application. > > Should I proceed with this? > And also, what API would you recommend for the text to speech feature, > referred > to as Alice in the python version? -- James Cameron http://quozl.netrek.org/ ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] SpellCheck for write activity project
Ah yes James, that's exactly what I meant to ask. Thank you all for your feedback. The project idea mentions that We can use an existing API based text editor for the base. I've decided to go with QuillJS (one of the mentioned options), mainly for the flexibility and the fact that It can be optimized to such great extent. Since it isn't confined inside an iframe like many other legacy editors that i came across, I can tailor it to perfectly match the Sugarizer environment.Also, the lack of any dependencies makes up for a lot of simplicity. I've tested the basic functionalities and they all match up to the original python version of the Write application. Should I proceed with this? And also, what API would you recommend for the text to speech feature, referred to as Alice in the python version? ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] SpellCheck for write activity project
Thanks Alex. Write activity is based on AbiWord, and already has built-in spell check feature. I had guessed Jake was asking about a JavaScript module, as part of the [Write activity for Sugarizer] idea. https://github.com/sugarlabs/GSoC/blob/master/Ideas-2019.md#write-activity-for-sugarizer I've no idea what would be an appropriate module to use. A search and selection could be part of the project. -- James Cameron http://quozl.netrek.org/ ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] SpellCheck for write activity project
Jake, I would personally like to encourage you to not re-implement the wheel. Aspell has been around for a long time, quite possibly longer than you've been alive, and has python bindings, and a C API: See https://pypi.org/project/aspell-python-py3/ and https://github.com/WojciechMula/aspell-python Jake Scarlet wrote on 4/4/19 7:36 AM: Would it be preferable if I used an existing library for the spellcheck feature or if I created one by myself ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
[Sugar-devel] SpellCheck for write activity project
Would it be preferable if I used an existing library for the spellcheck feature or if I created one by myself ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
