- From: Jens O. Meiert <jens@meiert.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 10:00:27 -0700
- To: Daniel Weck <daniel.weck@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
> 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". To me it seems the problem boils down to the fact that, per common understanding, only humans speak, and that humans have a gender. I can see why we would extend the spec to include machines having voices too but I wonder whether such a voice wouldn’t inevitably be compared against a human voice, and hence either be perceived male or female. This may not be the most scientific of problem descriptions but somehow this looks to me as if there isn’t really such thing as a neutral voice. Or that “neutral” as a voice family needs to either be there “politically,” to maintain the idea of a neutral voice, or to indicate no preference (for which “auto” may be more appropriate). Perhaps I just lack imagination though. -- Jens O. Meiert http://meiert.com/en/
Received on Tuesday, 24 July 2012 17:01:22 UTC