W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: Comments about SSML from ITS WG

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 07:42:10 +0900
Message-ID: <48DC13C2.1050704@w3.org>
To: Dan Burnett <dburnett@voxeo.com>
CC: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>, www-voice@w3.org, public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org

Hello Dan,

thank you for your mail. I accept your resolution and wish you all the 
best for the Candidate Recommendation.

Felix

Dan Burnett さんは書きました:
> Dear Felix,
>
> Thank you for your private comment.
>
> Resolution:  Accepted
> Explanation:  We agree with you and have decided to adjust our schemas 
> to allow attributes from non-SSML namespaces to occur on all SSML 1.1 
> elements.  FYI, we will also allow elements from non-SSML namespaces 
> to occur as children of any SSML 1.1 element.
>
> If you accept our resolution to your request, can you please reply 
> indicating that you accept our resolutions?
> If we do not hear from you within two weeks of today we will assume 
> that you have accepted our resolution.
>
> Because we are trying to publish the Candidate Recommendation before 
> the publishing moratorium in October, I humbly request that you reply 
> by Monday, 29 September, if at all possible.  Although you do have the 
> full two weeks to reply if you need it, it would help us tremendously 
> if you could provide us with a reply by Monday.
>
> Dan Burnett
> SSML 1.1 Co-Editor
> Voice Browser Working Group
>
> On Sep 17, 2008, at 11:17 PM, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>
>>
>> Hello Dan, all ,
>>
>> this is a private reply.
>>
>> Dan Burnett さんは書きました:
>>>
>>> Dear Jirka (and ITS WG),
>>>
>>> Thank you for your comments. Our responses are embedded below, 
>>> preceded by "DB>>".
>>> If you have any concerns with our responses, please let us know. If 
>>> we do not hear from you within two weeks of today we will assume 
>>> that you have accepted our resolutions.
>>>
>>> Dan Burnett
>>> SSML 1.1 Co-Editor
>>> Voice Browser Working Group
>>>
>>> On Jul 17, 2008, at 9:50 AM, Jirka Kosek wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> ITS WG reviewed SSML 1.1 
>>>> (http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-speech-synthesis11-20080620/) from 
>>>> perspective of suitability for internationalization and localization.
>>>>
>>>> We would appreciate if you can incorporate our feedback into SSML.
>>>>
>>>> SSML should allow usage of ITS markup (http://www.w3.org/TR/its/), 
>>>> because SSML documents contain natural text with speech markup and 
>>>> as such it is very likely that they can be translated.
>>>>
>>>> SSML currently doesn't provide direct support for ITS and has 
>>>> limited extensibility which prevents using ITS (see below).
>>>>
>>>> Problem 1:
>>>> ==========
>>>>
>>>> Section 2.2.3 
>>>> (http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-speech-synthesis11-20080620/#S2.2.3) 
>>>> allows usage of foreign elements inside SSML documents. Thus it is 
>>>> legitimate to use elements like its:rules or its:ruby in SSML 
>>>> documents.
>>>>
>>>> However specification doesn't explicitly allow to use foreign 
>>>> attributes. This means that it is not possible to use local ITS 
>>>> attributes like its:translate.
>>>>
>>>> Solution 1:
>>>> ===========
>>>>
>>>> SSML should allow foreign attributes on any SSML element. Ideally 
>>>> such possibility will not be mentioned only in prose of spec, but 
>>>> also XML schema will specify this using xs:anyAttribute (and 
>>>> similarly by xs:any for elements).
>>>
>>> DB>> Resolution: Accepted with modifications
>>> DB>> Explanation: We agree that non-SSML attributes should be 
>>> permitted in the same way that non
>>> DB>> SSML elements are permitted, and in fact the other subsections 
>>> of 2.2 describe this in detail. We
>>> DB>> will extend the text in 2.2.3 to indicate that attributes are 
>>> also allowed. However, your request to
>>> DB>> allow ITS attributes does not, in our opinion, introduce any 
>>> more need to generalize the Schema
>>> DB>> than was already present in SSML 1.0 (and hence 1.1). We 
>>> believe that converting the Schema
>>> DB>> to use xs:anyAttribute and xs:any would trivialize the Schema. 
>>> We do not plan to change the
>>> DB>> Schema.
>>
>>
>> My reaction may not come to you as a surprise ... I would propose a 
>> similar resolution as for the PLS 1.0 schema. Both in PLS 1.0 and 
>> SSML 1.1 you already have one element for general, additional markup. 
>> In SSML 1.1 this is the metadata element which has both element and 
>> attribute extensibility. I understand that you do not want to 
>> introduce general element extensibility, but I would propose you to 
>> do the same as I proposed for PLS 1.0: add general attribute 
>> extensibility to the SML 1.1. schema. I think this is harmless and a 
>> huge benefit for "foreign vocabularies" like ITS.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Problem 2:
>>>> ==========
>>>>
>>>> Element sub have attribute alias 
>>>> (http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-speech-synthesis11-20080620/#S3.1.11) 
>>>> which contains text for pronuncation. However it is not possible to 
>>>> attach any ITS category to single attribute. Moreover using 
>>>> attributes for natural language text is against XML I18N BP 
>>>> (http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-xml-i18n-bp-20080213/#DevAttributes). 
>>>> Using subelement for alias will be better solution.
>>>>
>>>> Solution 2:
>>>> ===========
>>>>
>>>> Use alias subelement instead of attribute.
>>>>
>>>
>>> DB>> Resolution: Rejected (deferred)
>>> DB>> Explanation: We agree that the inability to add markup to the 
>>> spoken text of the <sub> element
>>> DB>> is a lack within SSML. This comment was raised during the Last 
>>> Call Working Draft for SSML 1.0
>>> DB>> (see SSCR145-46 at
>>> DB>> 
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-speech-synthesis-20031218/disposition.html#SSCR145-46). 
>>>
>>> DB>> We still believe that a change of this sort will break 
>>> compatibility with SSML 1.0, and that the
>>> DB>> stated scope of SSML 1.1 (see Section 1.2 in
>>> DB>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-ssml11reqs-20070611/#intro) does 
>>> not suggest making this sort
>>> DB>> of change. We propose to defer this change, as before, to a 
>>> future version where SSML is more
>>> DB>> broadly re-written.
>>
>> I personally understand and agree with your position to keep the 
>> alias attribute for backwards compatibilty reasons.
>>
>> Felix
>>
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Jirka Kosek
>>>> on behalf of ITS WG
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Jirka Kosek e-mail: jirka@kosek.cz http://xmlguru.cz
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Professional XML consulting and training services
>>>> DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 member
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Thursday, 25 September 2008 22:42:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 25 September 2008 22:42:51 GMT