- From: Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 21:57:45 +0100
- To: "Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Cc: "Matt Morgan-May" <mattmay@adobe.com>, "HTML Working Group" <public-html@w3.org>, "W3C WAI-XTECH" <wai-xtech@w3.org>
On 14/05/2008, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote: > On May 14, 2008, at 23:33, Gez Lemon wrote: > > > > That isn't how screen readers work. Screen readers work by converting > > text into phonemes that they can then synthesise and output to the > > user. This approach is obviously a lot quicker and more flexible than > > containing a static list of dictionary entries. > > > > > Whether the speech synthesis is dictionary based is not the point. The > point is, can a screen reader reasonable have *a* dictionary for its speech > language. In many cases, the platform provides spell checking, so a screen > reader could test if a string spell checks successfully to make a guess if > speaking it will be any good. Spell checkers often don't have words in their vocabulary that are legitimate words. What do you suggest happens when a screen reader encounters a word that it doesn't have in its dictionary? Ignore it? Gez -- _____________________________ Supplement your vitamins http://juicystudio.com
Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2008 20:58:22 UTC