W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > July to September 2000

RE: http://www.w3.org/TR/speech-synthesis

From: Andrew Hunt <andrew.hunt@speechworks.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 18:47:24 -0400
To: "Pawson, David" <DPawson@rnib.org.uk>, "'Larson, Jim A'" <jim.a.larson@intel.com>, <www-voice@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NEBBIPBPMMJJJOKAKJHNOEKJCEAA.andrew.hunt@speechworks.com>
David,

There may be some confusion because XSLT has been considered for several 
uses by the Voice Browser Working Group.

In his response I think Jim Larson was referring to the use of XSLT
and ECMAScript as part of a "semantic interpretation" activity that
is coupled with the grammar specification currently available as a draft.

XSLT has definitely been considered as part of the Speech Synthesis Markup 
Language (URL in the subject line).  The omission of XSL aural styling
from that spec is historic and I expect will be corrected shortly.
[XSL was still in flux as the original drafts of SSML were produced.]
The current draft is intended to be a final form representation
of an XHTML+ACSS transformation.  As you point out it is equally 
useful as final form for XHTML+XSL-with-aural-styling.

Regards,
  Andrew Hunt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-voice-request@w3.org [mailto:www-voice-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Pawson, David
> Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 3:55 AM
> To: 'Larson, Jim A'; 'www-voice@w3.org'
> Subject: RE: http://www.w3.org/TR/speech-synthesis
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the note Jim .
> 
> A couple of points in reply.
> I don't understand your use of the term scripting language.
> Neither XSLT nor XSL fall into that category as I understand them.
> Nowhere within XSLT is the word scripting mentioned.
> XSLT defines itself as ' a language for transforming XML documents into
> other XML documents.'
> 
> 
> 
> > As I recall, the basic reasons Workin Group members did not 
> > choose XSLT
> > included members feeling uncomfortable with the new XSLT, a 
> > large ramp-up
> > effort to use XSLT, and additional implmentation effort for XSLT when
> > implmenetations of other scripting languages already exist. 
> 
> Point noted though I fail to see the relevance.
> 
> Your spec, para 1.3.
> <quote>Interoperability with Aural CSS: The speech synthesis markup language
> is a final form representation that can be produced when XSLT is applied to
> XHTML with ACSS. ACSS is covered in Section 19 of the Cascading Style
> Sheets, level 2 CSS2 Specification (12-May-1998). This usage of speech
> synthesis facilitates improved accessibility to existing HTML and XHTML
> content.</quote>
> 
> was the source of my concern. Since the aural styling of XSL is directly
> derived
> from that of CSS I simply wondered why you included one, and not the other.
> 
> I understand from your comments that your group are not familiar with
> the XSL working draft, and can understand that.
> 
> Having pointed this out, I would hope that this omission can be rectified
> prior to its arrival at the AC-forum for voting. 
> 
> Regards DaveP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 13 September 2000 18:47:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 30 October 2006 12:48:53 GMT