Noted. I will go ahead with speak
On Sun, Apr 7, 2019, 1:31 PM Lionel Laské <lionel.la...@gmail.com> 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, <sugar-devel-requ...@lists.sugarlabs.org> a > écrit : > >> >> Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2019 12:34:56 +0530 >> From: Jake Scarlet <mmatt...@gmail.com> >> To: James Cameron <qu...@laptop.org> >> 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 <qu...@laptop.org> 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
