- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 18:45:19 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org, Claudio Santambrogio <csant@opera.com>
On 07/23/2012 05:51 PM, Jon Rimmer wrote: > On 23 July 2012 14:56, Jens O. Meiert<jens@meiert.com> wrote: >> >> What is the definition of a “neutral” voice (family)? It seems the >> spec so far fails to define this [1]? >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-speech/#voice-props-voice-family > > However, a question worth addressing might be: Is "neutral" intended > to communicate, "I don't care about the gender, use whatever is the > cultural default", or "I do care about the gender, and I want the > voice to be gender non-specific if possible." That's a very interesting question. My guess is also the latter, but perhaps the former might be a use case worth addressing, e.g. as an 'auto' value. > If it were the former, the speech engine would default to a male > voice, but if it were the latter, it would use a distorted or > robotic voice. Or maybe just raise the pitch to a more neutral range. I doubt 'neutral' is intended to mean "inhuman". :) > My interpretation would be that it is the latter, but perhaps it > should be made clear. Filed as ISSUE-271: https://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/271 Fwiw, the CSS2.1 Aural chapter only lists 'male', 'female', and 'child' as options. Maybe Claudio knows what was intended. Claudio? ~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 24 July 2012 01:45:47 UTC