W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2011

Re: [css3-speech] voice-volume

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 10:18:31 -0700
Message-ID: <4DCAC4E7.4010608@inkedblade.net>
To: Daniel Weck <daniel.weck@gmail.com>
CC: W3C style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
On 05/10/2011 11:50 PM, Daniel Weck wrote:
> On 11 May 2011, at 04:23, fantasai wrote:
>> I think 'linear' is somewhat misleading, since the normal
>> 0-100 scale /could/ be linear. (I think 'absolute' would be a better keyword
>> because 'absolute 0' is absolutely silent, but I'm open to suggestions.)
> The 'relative' keyword is used somewhere else, with a totally different
> meaning (e.g. the syntax "+5" can denote an absolute value, but it may
> also express a relative change based on another; usually-inherited; value).

I don't understand why the 'relative' keyword elsewhere prevents us from
using 'absolute' here?

>> x-soft
>> The minimum audible level. Equivalent to '0'.
>> soft
>> Equivalent to '25'.
>> medium
>> The listener's preferred volume level. Equivalent to '50'.
>> loud
>> Equivalent to '75'.
>> x-loud
>> The maximum tolerable level. Equivalent to '100'.
> 'x-soft' must correspond to 'silent' when expressed on the "linear" scale,
> so your suggestion doesn't work.

I don't think 'linear' should be combinable with the keywords. It does
not afford the author any extra capability, and it confuses the meaning
of the keywords.

> To be compatible with SSML, we need to allow the 'linear' keyword with
> named values as well (I must update the draft, actually).

I don't see where SSML uses an option to redefine its keyword values
to fall on a linear scale such that x-soft is equal to silent.

> The way I see it, the 5 enumerated values are "shortcuts" to the 5 defined points on the numerical scale, so I prefer to
> define the actual meaning of the values (which depends on the 'linear' keyword) in the <number> section only.

Ah, see, I disagree. The keywords are defining which points of the scale
correspond to what actual volumes. The scale is nonlinear because of those
anchor points. We're defining 50 to be the preferred volume /because/ it
is mapped to the 'medium' keyword, not the other way around.

>> linear
>> When present, the 'linear' keyword indicates that the <number> represents
>> a value on the linear volume scale between 'silent' and 'x-loud'.
> That's not true, it is still the range 'x-soft' to 'x-loud', but 'x-soft' now means "silent" :)
> (as per my other remarks above)

I disagree with those remarks. :)

> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/aural.html#propdef-volume
> Could you please point to a CSS 2 property definition that exemplifies good editorial practice? Thanks.

Like the propdef-volume link you have there?

> The "relative" keyword is mandatory for pitch values expressed in Hz or semitone units. Would you advice to break down
> <relative-change> into separate fields, and to allow the keyword on either left or right of the actual numerical value ?
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-speech/#voice-pitch


>> For cues, do we really need 'silent'? Why wouldn't the author just remove the
>> cue, replacing with a rest if necessary?
> User stylesheets must be able to silence audio cues with "!important" rules. I agree that the use-case is limited (one would
> normally specify "none" to completely remove a cue), but we need to be consistent with voice volume.

I'm not convinced of this use case. Do we really have users who would
rather silence a cue than remove it?

Received on Wednesday, 11 May 2011 17:19:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:45 UTC