- From: Daniel Weck <daniel.weck@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 09:20:42 +0100
- To: Jon Rimmer <jon.rimmer@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Jens O. Meiert" <jens@meiert.com>, www-style@w3.org
Note that SSML 1.1 doesn't define "neutral" either: http://www.w3.org/TR/speech-synthesis11/#edef_voice I have always interpreted the 'neutral' value as "if possible, pick a voice that doesn't sound male or female in an obvious manner. Note that this may select a more robotic voice, or for example a human-sounding stylised voice". Daniel On 24 Jul 2012, at 01:51, 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 > > > Well, the note accompanying <gender> says... > > "Note that the interpretation of the relationship between a > person's age or gender, and a recognizable > type of voice, cannot realistically be defined in a universal > manner as it effectively depends on numerous > criteria (cultural, linguistic, biological, etc.)..." > > So, perhaps it's not possible to really define it further, as it's > only intended as a hint whose meaning is left up to the speech > synthesis engine? > > 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." 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. > > My interpretation would be that it is the latter, but perhaps it > should be made clear. > > Jon >
Received on Tuesday, 24 July 2012 08:21:15 UTC