12

Example: How can I use Dragon NaturallySpeaking to write LaTeX math formulas by voice efficiently?

The question is TeX-specific, and I believe could be of interest to many TeX users, but indeed no speech recognition engine I am aware of is TeX specific. Does that make the question off-topic?

  • 8
    shouldn't be off-topic if the question is tex-specific. use the tag [accessibility] to indicate the context. (and this is a topic that really could use more knowledgeable attention.) – barbara beeton Apr 21 '15 at 16:53
  • 3
    Another case where close voting is utterly unnecessary. – percusse Apr 22 '15 at 1:05
  • 1
    Being interesting to TeX users doesn't necessarily make it on-topic. As I've noted in my comment on percusse's answer, I can see this both ways (is it really TeX-specific or not: tricky at least). – Joseph Wright Apr 22 '15 at 8:21
  • 2
    @JosephWright -- perhaps i'm biased, but i've received enough questions about "accessible tex" to know it's an important, if hidden, problem. providing a usable tool will require tex expertise, and that's the basis on which i believe it's "on topic", if, admittedly, marginal. – barbara beeton Apr 22 '15 at 12:57
  • 1
    @barbarabeeton Like I said, i can see this as marginal. There are at least two types of accessibility issue: getting the code in to TeX (so at the editor end) and getting accessible output from TeX. The latter is clearly on-topic, the former much more tricky. – Joseph Wright Apr 22 '15 at 13:07
  • 1
    TeX in general seems to be a very work intensive way of doing something which many lay people can a lot of the time quickly produce in word processors etc. This type of 'automation' question can reduce the amount of work involved to produce the product. Definitely a good question and practical to make TeX more accessible, in my opinion! Any kind of TeX automation system helping a user is 'on topic' for me. Command line running TeX scripts, add-ons providing drawing shape templates, formula templates etc. – McGafter Apr 30 '15 at 8:49
12

No they are not. We have some happy-trigger people who likes to see only what they want to see. And they vote to close on practically anything ignoring our long-lost grace period and wait-for-a-reply habits.

That's how five people who have nothing else to do, can alienate users from once-known as a friendly place in the name of almost a hundred active answerers for a handful stupid colored dots and rep points next to their avatars.

I guess I should join the well I'm not hanging out here anymore gang soon.

  • 3
    No no no no no! The negative people will run out of steam and find some other place of the internet to police. The warm-hearted welcoming people that made this site what it is need to stay (or at least they should wait to jump ship until there's another equal or better ship to jump on, so to speak) – Jake Apr 22 '15 at 6:49
  • 3
    I'm not sure 'trigger happy' people is the issue here. This one is to me borderline for on-topic as we have to ask ourselves the question 'Does expertise on TeX help to answer it?'. Certainly writing a speak recognition system, whatever the output, is not in that domain. On the other hand one can argue that people who know about TeX may know a specific tool that can do this, which would be on-topic. I can see it both ways. – Joseph Wright Apr 22 '15 at 8:18
  • 5
    please don't jump ship! your participation has been valuable, at least to those of us who wish to keep this a friendly and helpful place. – barbara beeton Apr 22 '15 at 13:00
  • @JosephWright The original question is not about writing a full-fledged ASR but just customizing the voice command stack for TeX. – Franck Dernoncourt Apr 22 '15 at 15:59
  • 1
    @FranckDernoncourt Yes, understood: that could still be viewed as a question that needs expertise in a different field. (Note: I am not taking a view here on the on/off topic nature of the question, I'm trying to lay out potential arguments in both directions.) – Joseph Wright Apr 22 '15 at 16:01
  • 4
    Sir, don't leave! Please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, with sugar on top! – Paulo Cereda Apr 23 '15 at 23:32
6

I must admit, that I was one of close-voters (but not the initiating one) and I voted to leave it closed, so I am one of the bad guys ;-)

The question itself is nice and very intriguing to have some software that recognizes speech and transforms it into LaTeX commands, as the OP requested.

However it's a question that is very peripherally connected to LaTeX/TeX itself since the OP misses features in software basically nobody can contribute to, contrary to the fact that basically one of the LaTeX core developpers and package authors contribute to LaTeX/TeX or provide support to LaTeX code generators (which does not seem to be case for Dragon NaturallySpeaking software), so I hold the question, unfortunately enough, for off-topic, although the background is quite nice and justified with the tag as Barbara Beeton suggested in her comment.

Franck, I hope you're not too disappointed about this and stay at our community nevertheless.

  • 2
    Thanks. "OP misses features in software basically nobody can contribute to" -> one can contribute: only the ASR is closed source, but all the voice command stack is open. – Franck Dernoncourt Apr 21 '15 at 19:32
  • @FranckDernoncourt: Oh, really? Sorry, I did not know that. Well, perhaps closing was too early then, but on the other hand, your question is about 18 months old and no contribution was obviously made – user31729 Apr 21 '15 at 19:35
  • I am still hopeful :-) I know at least one guy (prof in physics) who does it quite efficiently but too busy to contribute to SE, and uses an ancient version of Dragon. So basically achieving decent speed (ok decent is subjective) is feasible. – Franck Dernoncourt Apr 21 '15 at 19:40
  • @FranckDernoncourt: Just seen that it was reopened (+1 however) ;-) – user31729 Apr 21 '15 at 19:42

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .