W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > April to June 2003

RE: vocalization and BIDI in SSML (was: RE: Consolidated comments on SSML)

From: <David.Pawson@rnib.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 08:03:39 +0100
Message-ID: <9B66BBD37D5DD411B8CE00508B69700F049E184E@pborolocal.rnib.org.uk>
To: w3c-wai-pf@w3.org
Cc: www-voice@w3.org

I'm certainly not happy with the response below.
From our 3 year experience with synthetic speech it is blatantly clear
that "As long as  there is a way to write the text, the engine can figure
out
 how to speak it." produces jibberish in many cases.

This is the basis for the external 'speak as' file. The synth
can usually speak a word reasonably if 'taught' by such a 
method. 

Fine if the end user can glance at a piece of text, but a lot
more important if the audio is the only access the user has to information.


regards DaveP





Al wrote:
> I think we may want to consider how these responses fit with 
> accessibility.
> from Dan Burnett on behalf of Voice Browser WG:
> 
> -- Please quote this citation in follow-ups:
> http://www.w3.org/mid/ED834EE1FDD6C3468AB0F5569206E6E91AF1CF@M
> PB1EXCH02.nuance.com
> 
> ]
> 
> Dear Martin (and the Internationalization Working Group),

> [VBWG responses follow]
> 
> [1] Rejected.  We reject the notion that on principle this is
> more difficult for some languages.  For all languages supported
> by synthesis vendors today this is not a problem.  As long as
> there is a way to write the text, the engine can figure out
> how to speak it.  Given the lack of broad support by vendors
> for Arabic and Hebrew, we prefer not to include examples for
> those languages.
>  > General:
>  > [01]  For some languages, text-to-speech conversion is 
> more difficult
>  >        than for others. In particular, Arabic and Hebrew 
> are usually
>  >        written with none or only a few vowels indicated. Japanese
>  >        often needs separate indications for pronunciation.
>  >        It was no clear to us whether such cases were considered,
>  >        and if they had been considered, what the appropriate
>  >        solution was.
>  >        SSML should be clear about how it is expected to 
> handle these
>  >        cases, and give examples. Potential solutions we 
> came up with:
>  >        a) require/recommend that text in SSML is written in an
>  >        easily 'speakable' form (i.e. vowelized for Arabic/Hebrew,
>  >        or with Kana (phonetic alphabet(s)) for Japanese. (Problem:
>  >        displaying the text visually would not be 
> satisfactory in this
>  >        case); b) using <sub>; c) using <phoneme> (Problem: only
>  >        having IPA available would be too tedious on authors);
>  >        d) reusing some otherwise defined markup for this purpose
>  >        (e.g. <ruby> from http://www.w3.org/TR/ruby/ for Japanese);
>  >        e) creating some additional markup in SSML.
>  >

- 

NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is 
confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the 
intended recipient you are hereby notified that you must not use, 
disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on this email's content. If 
you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender 
immediately and then delete the email and any attachments from your 
system.

RNIB has made strenuous efforts to ensure that emails and any 
attachments generated by its staff are free from viruses. However, it 
cannot accept any responsibility for any viruses which are 
transmitted. We therefore recommend you scan all attachments.

Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email 
and any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily 
represent those of RNIB.

RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227

Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk 
Received on Tuesday, 10 June 2003 03:04:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 30 October 2006 12:48:58 GMT