Re: SSML attributes vs embedded

Interesting point. We can certainly discuss it more in this week’s pronunciation call. Would you create a issue in github please?

Regards,


From: Alan Reeve <alan.reeve@cambiumassessment.com>
Date: Monday, July 20, 2020 at 12:11 PM
To: "public-pronunciation@w3.org" <public-pronunciation@w3.org>
Subject: SSML attributes vs embedded
Resent-From: <public-pronunciation@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Monday, July 20, 2020 at 12:11 PM


Greetings,



I hope it's not inappropriate for me to send an email like this as I've just recently joined the group and then was out for a week after that and... etc. I see there are two models that are currently being considered. I had one question and it's probably already been debated and dismissed, but I'll ask anyways.



Was an attribute based model that broke each piece of SSML data into a separate attribute considered so as to avoid the JSON issue? I know it would be more verbose, but while I like the attribute model better personally I don't care for the JSON.



For example, instead of



According the 2010 US Census, the population of <span data-ssml='{"say-as" : {"interpret-as":"digits"}}'>90274</span> increased to 25209 from 24976 over the past 10 years.



it'd be



According the 2010 US Census, the population of <span data-ssml='say-as'  data-ssml-interpret-as='digits'>90274</span> increased to 25209 from 24976 over the past 10 years.



- Thanks, Alan


________________________________

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.


Thank you for your compliance.

________________________________