W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > April to June 2000

Re: Proposed minimal requirements for audio/speech checkpoints.

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 22:29:43 -0400
Message-ID: <394ED717.996F37B2@w3.org>
To: Harvey Bingham <hbingham@ACM.org>
CC: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Harvey Bingham wrote:
> At 2000-06-12 15:13-0400, Ian Jacobs wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >I propose that minimal requirements for the following checkpoints
> >from the 10 June draft [1] be established on the basis of
> >property values in the CSS2 Recommendation [2]:
> >
> >   4.8 Allow the user to configure and control the audio volume.
> >   4.9 Allow the user to configure and control synthesized speech
> >       playback rate.
> >   4.11 Allow the user to configure synthesized speech pitch, gender,
> >        and other articulation characteristics.
> I appreciate your finding the way to include speech rate speed-up,
> by any means, in spite of your recently expressed feeling that that
> is a change of scope, so could not be included.

Actually, speed-up and slow-down amount to 'control' of the properties,
as opposed to 'configuration' only.
> By analogy to how Netscape Navigator allows font "larger  Ctrl-]",
> and "smaller  Ctrl-[" that I find much more useful than the five font size
> choices that Microsoft IE5 allows, I would encourage allowing the
> "faster" and "slower" relative values be made available for the user.

Do we have implementation experience?
> I also note that the speed changes should be done without pitch shift,
> using the technique of stretching or shrinking silences between words,
> and generally the vowel sounds within words.

That's indicated as a technique.
> >I will write out the specific values for checkpoints 4.8, 4.9,
> >and 4.11, but for now I want to get feedback as to whether
> >people think that this is a reasonable approach.
> >
> >IMPORTANT: I propose that we delete "and other articulation
> >characteristics" from checkpoint 4.11 since that makes it
> >much harder to specify minimal requirements.
> 4.11 That leaves pitch and gender. I question that they are independent.
> Most are unable to distinguish a countertenor from a soprano, or a
> tenor from a low alto. I am uncertain which of the other articulation
> characteristics help to make such distinctions, so agree that they
> are hard to specify minimal requirements. I'd go so far as to assert
> that only pitch is appropriate.

The WG should review this proposal to delete "gender" in favor
of "pitch".

 - Ian

> I refer to my other comment on SMIL use for narrated speech, for which
> speech speedup or slowdown (without pitch shift) is appropriate.
> Regards/Harvey Bingham

Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783
Received on Monday, 19 June 2000 22:29:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:27 UTC