Re: Joint mtg followup re XAUR and Avatars

Thanks for the input Janina, and yes, if we are to continue/progress 
with user need, we need to be clear around what represents quality vs an 
'out of the box ersatz avatar'.

I also wish we didn't have to use that term avatar, the budding 
Sanskritian in me objects!

Josh

> Janina Sajka <mailto:janina@rednote.net>
> Wednesday 19 May 2021 16:17
> I thought I should say for the record what I raised my hand to say when
> we ran out of time ...
>
> Regarding avatars ...
>
> I was highly impressed by the detailes that emerged about why avatars
> tend to fail SL users. I'm thinking we should capture a high level
> description of what would be required to create a successful avatar in
> the XAUR by way of answering any engineering interest in moving to their
> use prematurely.
>
> I believe the explanation is that SL captures far more than the words
> which are captured in a text transcript of what's being said. SL
> attempts to communicate more of the conversation than just the verbal
> language content we've learned to capture with paper and ink.
>
> Facial expression -- there are some 43 muscles that control facial
> expression, though if one googles this question the answers vary, 43,
> 42, 33 ...
>
> Implication: anyone building a signing avatar should provide a face and
> 43 functioning muscular variables.
>
> Similarly, there's the challenge to understand the nuance of vocal
> expression. Consider the word "O:"
>
> O (as in startled surprise)
> O? (as in really?)
> O (as in oops, which sometimes comes out as "o, o)
>
> There are more for just this one word, but I believe I've made my point.
>
> If we take this tack we avoid a perscription against engineering
> development and supplant it with the far more meaningful challenge of
> what it takes to design a satisfying avatar.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Janina
>
>


-- 
Emerging Web Technology Specialist/Accessibility (WAI/W3C)