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

Re: Comments from PFWG on CSS3 Speech Module

From: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 22:01:44 -0700
Cc: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, www-style@w3.org, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>, List WAI Liaison <wai-liaison@w3.org>, List WAI PF <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>
Message-id: <0A32096E-E501-4590-A1DE-EBEA7154A22B@apple.com>
To: Daniel Weck <daniel.weck@gmail.com>
Apologies for the delayed response.

On Oct 16, 2011, at 3:23 PM, Daniel Weck wrote:

> Hello Janina (et al),
> 
> We decided [1] to split the 'speak' property because there was a technical flaw with the single-property design: i.e. conflicting goals between {1} switching aural rendering on/off, and {2} specifying "how" to speak the selected element, resulting in ambiguous edge-cases when using nested definitions. Furthermore, the 'speak' property was not handling the relationship with 'display:none' correctly, so we fixed that too.
> 
> Consequently, this feature needed a number of important updates that were going to break existing implementations. Although I noted [2] the existence of some kind of preliminary support in WebKit, I was not aware of any active development targeting iOS5.
> 
> At any rate, I would suggest adopting the improved syntax and semantics. It is regrettable that the 2004 Working Draft of CSS Speech Module Level 3 had to stagnate in transient state for such a long time. At last, new resources means that we were/are able to fix the previous drafts shortcomings, and I am delighted to hear that Apple might be able to participate with reference implementations during the CR stage. :)

The 'speak' property (as defined in the previous WD) is implemented and testable in the public release of iOS 5. I'll file an issue to implement the new values for 'speak' and 'speak-as'

> As for you remark regarding the 'speak-as' values, doesn't the current syntax already meet your requirements?
> 
> normal | spell-out || digits || [ literal-punctuation | no-punctuation ]

I must've missed the double vertical bars when I read this the first time. This does meet the requirements. Thanks.
Received on Thursday, 27 October 2011 05:02:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:45 GMT