- From: Daniel Weck <daniel.weck@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2010 00:29:55 +0000
- To: www-style@w3.org, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
FYI, the issue is now filed into the tracking system: http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/150 /Dan On 10 Dec 2010, at 23:51, Daniel Weck wrote: > > > On 10 Dec 2010, at 23:09, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: >> Yes, but if you consider square brackets to represent grouping, >> then the >> examples in the draft do not match the grammar, `voice-family: male >> 2` >> for instance is not valid because <age> is not optional but omitted >> in >> the example. However, it would match if you read (some of the) square >> brackets to represent optionality. I do agree that the Working Group >> does not seem to have addressed my comment yet. > > > The <age> and <number> fields of the "voice-family" CSS 3 Speech > property [1] were added to the fields specified by CSS 2.1 Aural > style sheets [2]. > > There seems to be a typo in the CSS 3 grammar indeed, as the > examples are correct (they are backward compatible with the CSS 2.1 > notation). > > I would suggest the following errata (line breaks for clarity, "xxx" > is the exact duplicate of line #2): > > ---------------- > [xxx,]* > [[<specific-voice> | [<age>? <generic-voice>]] <number>?] > | inherit > ---------------- > > ...but actually I am questioning the use of the <number> > discriminator based on a <specific-voice>. I can understand the > selection logic based on a <generic-voice>, but I am not sure how > the "preferred variant" heuristics can apply to a specific voice > instance. Therefore I hereby present the errata of the errata: > > ---------------- > [xxx,]* > [<specific-voice> | [<age>? <generic-voice> <number>?]] > | inherit > ---------------- > > Comments welcome. > Regards, Daniel > > [1] > http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-speech/#voice-family > > [2] > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/aural.html#propdef-voice-family
Received on Saturday, 11 December 2010 00:30:31 UTC