- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:11:09 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 07/13/2011 02:13 PM, fantasai wrote: > > an absolute frequency OR a keyword value and potentially also > a frequency, semitone, and/or percentage representing any non-zero > offsets > > Basically, if the base is an absolute frequency, rather than a keyword, > then we can just perform the calculations and come up with the Hertz. > That will be the computed value. > > If the base is a keyword, then we need to preserve that keyword together > with the offset. We can't represent the offset as Hz alone, because > the number of Hz corresponding to a semitone or a percent depends on > what the base frequency is -- which we can't compute right now, because > we don't know it, we only know the keyword name. > > Kinda messy, huh? So it occurs to me that the offsets, because they're computed differently at different base values, can't be represented just as a tuple. You'd have to represent them as a list, because medium + 2st + 200Hz + 2st != medium + 4st + 200Hz This seems excessively complicated, so I'm wondering if maybe we should have the computed value be either * a keyword if only the keyword is specified by itself, otherwise * a fixed frequency calculated by converting the keyword value (if any) to a frequency based on the voice-family and applying any other additions and subtractions This means that if you're using anything other than a bare keyword, the frequency will inherit absolutely through a voice change, but if you're only using a keyword, the frequency will recalculate on a voice change. Would that be sufficient? ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 18 July 2011 23:11:40 UTC