- From: Daniel Weck <daniel.weck@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 14:12:22 +0100
- To: W3C style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>, Andrew Thompson <lordpixel@mac.com>
Hi ! There are currently no implementations of 'speakability' [1], as it has only just been created from the old [2] 'speak' property (which is now split into 2 distinct properties). Existing implementations [3] of previous versions of the CSS3-Speech draft will have to be updated anyway, so we might as well grab the opportunity to fix the specification now. Given the scarcity of both CSS-Speech/Aural implementations and content, I would have thought that the "annoyance" caused by the renaming / refactoring of the speaking properties would be minimal. Note that the proposed change would not diverge much from the old CSS 2.1 Aural Appendix [4] either: 'speak' ==> [auto | none | normal] 'speak-style' ==> [ normal | spell-out | digits | literal-punctuation | no-punctuation ] (PS: I am not keen on your suggested 'pronunciation' property name, because of the risk of confusion with phonemes and lexicons ... thus why I propose 'speak-style' instead) Thoughts ? Daniel [1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-speech/#speakability [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-css3-speech-20041216/#speaking-props [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Mar/0389.html [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/aural.html#speaking-props On 27 Apr 2011, at 13:21, Andrew Thompson wrote: > You're correct, use of this invented word is ugly. > > This is tricky because in an ideal world I think speakability would > in fact be speak (as in speak: none or speak: auto) and the existing > speak property would work well if it were called pronunciation > (pronunciation: normal, pronunciation: spell-out). Still no chance > of that now. > > 'Speaking' doesn't work because it's the present participle of a > verb (gerund) and you need a noun construct like speaking-style or > an adjective for consistency. > > Some alternatives > 'speech' > 'audibility' > 'aural' > ? > > On Apr 26, 2011, at 10:32 PM, Daniel Weck <daniel.weck@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hello ! >> >> I am not a native english speaker, so I would like to query your >> opinion about the 'speakability' property name [1]. A better >> alternative may be 'speaking', but I'm concerned about its >> juxtaposition with the existing 'speak' property, and the resulting >> potential misinterpretations. >> >> Note that although CSS3-Speech is directly "inspired" by SSML [2], >> the closest equivalent to the 'speak' CSS functionality is >> described in the "say-as attribute values" W3C Note [3]. I would >> however not recommend the use of "say-as" instead of 'speak', >> because in the case of CSS3-Speech, the feature scope is much more >> limited (in other words, using "say-as" would effectively be >> misleading). >> >> Regards, Daniel >> >> [1] >> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-speech/#speaking-props >> >> [2] >> http://www.w3.org/TR/speech-synthesis/ >> >> [3] >> http://www.w3.org/TR/ssml-sayas/ >> Daniel Weck daniel.weck@gmail.com
Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2011 13:12:58 UTC