- From: Daniel Weck <daniel.weck@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 14:55:51 +0100
- To: Gregory Rosmaita <gregory.rosmaita@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org, wai-xtech <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Hi Greg, Regarding "COMMENT 1": I re-read the current specification prose, I re-read your suggested editorial changes, and I came to the conclusion that the current prose already addresses your concerns. We explicitly give an example for 50% (half the inherited speaking rate), and further below we even give an example for 120%. We also express the fact that the baseline rate to which the percentage applies is speech processor-dependent. However, there is a mistake/typo in the example: "multiplied by 1.2" is not "one and a half times the speaking rate". This needs to be fixed. Regarding "COMMENT 2": I don't think it is the role of a CSS specification to provide authoring guidelines (even informatively). I will double-check with the more seasoned Working Group members, but I believe it is uncommon practice to advise authors in the way you suggest. Please let us know whether this response is satisfactory. Kind regards, Dan On 1 Oct 2011, at 04:13, Gregory Rosmaita wrote: > aloha! > > in regards voice-rate percentage values, the LC draft of css3-speech > states: > > QUOTE > <percentage> > Only non-negative percentage values are allowed. This > represents a change relative to the given keyword value (see > enumeration above), or to the default value for the root > element, or otherwise to the inherited speaking rate (which may > itself be a combination of a keyword value and of a percentage, > in which case percentages are combined multiplicatively). For > example, 50% means that the speaking rate gets multiplied by > 0.5 (half the value). > UNQUOTE > > COMMENT 1: if the "currently active" voice rate is represented by 100%, > and from that "baseline" scaled up or down (depending upon whether one > wants to increase or deecrease the rate) using positive percentage > values ONLY, then that needs to be explicitly stated in the > css3-speech recommendation. while the 100% "baseline" concept is far > from novel to those proficient with CSS, it is not an obvious or "self > evident" convention, and therefore should be explicitly stated so as > to eliminate confusion as to how positive percentages greater than > 100% can be used to increase voice-rate and how positive percentages > less than 100%, but greater than 0%, are used to decrease voice-rate. > > SUGGESTED TEXT: > > A value less than 100% slows down the voice-rate. Values of greater > than 100% indicate an increase in voice-rate. The actual rate of > speech relative to the "currently active rate" of 100% is determined > by the capacities of the speech engine being used. > > > COMMENT 2. as an author and end user, i would be most comfortable using > "voice-rate" to effect small-scale changes in voice rate that are > neither disorienting nor painful for the end user to aurally process: > > body { voice-rate: inherit; > code { voice-rate: 90%; voice-stress: none; > speak-as: literal-punctuation; } > em { voice-rate: 110%; voice-stress: moderate; } > strong { voice-rate: 115%; voice-stress: strong; } > > authors should also be cautioned against using rate and/or volume alone > or in tandem to indicate a specific type of markup, as control over the > rate and volume of speech and its relative values are EXTREMELY important > user-defined settings, the bounds of which which are based upon the user's > needs, experience, other abilities/disabilities, and the type of content > being converted into speech. > > thanks, gregory. > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > ACCOUNTABILITY, n. The mother of caution. > -- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Gregory J. Rosmaita, gregory.rosmaita@gmail.com > Camera Obscura: http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/ > Oedipus' Online Complex: http://my.opera.com/oedipus/ > ---------------------------------------------------------- >
Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2011 13:56:35 UTC