RE: Comments for SSML 1.0 Last Call Working Draft

Dear Susan,

Thank you for your more recent review of the SSML specification.  We
believe this is the last email we have from you.

If you believe we have not adequately addressed your issues with our
responses, please let us know as soon as possible.  If we do not hear
from you within 14 days, we will take this as tacit acceptance.

Again, thank you for your input.

-- Dan Burnett
Synthesis Team Leader, VBWG

[VBWG responses are embedded, preceded by '>>>'.  We have rearranged the
text of your email in order to group some items together.]

-----Original Message-----
From: Susan Lesch [mailto:lesch@w3.org]
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 10:44 PM
To: www-voice@w3.org
Subject: Comments for SSML 1.0 Last Call Working Draft



Dear editors,

These are minor editorial comments for your Speech Synthesis Markup
Language Last Call Working Draft [1]. It has come a long way in the
past year and looks nice.

In the embedded CSS, for each occurrence of font-family: mono; use
"monospace" instead.

Results of
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-speech-synthesis-20021202/,spell gives
lots of false positives but it did find these:

s/estabilish/establish/
s/sucessfully/successfully/
s/behaviour/behavior/

In 3.2.1, one [RFC2396] -> RFC 2396

Some of the authors/editors/publishers names in the references section
are followed by a comma, one nothing, and some by a period. I'd make
them match.

s/The W3C Standard/This W3C standard/
s/'anyURI '/'anyURI'/
s/whitespace/white space/ (see http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml#sec-common-syn)
s/meta data/metadata/
s/namespaces in XML/Namespaces in XML/
s/members of the W3C Voice Browser Working Group/participants in
   the W3C Voice Browser Working Group/
s/mime type/MIME type/

We've changed the preferred spelling
s/Acknowledgements/Acknowledgments/ (my error)

It isn't necessary to capitalize normative and informative in the
appendixes' section labels.

>>> Proposed resolution (for all of the items above):  Accepted
>>> 
>>> We will fix these.

In the first table in 2.1.4, did you mean to spell out an example for
'telephone'?

>>> Proposed resolution:  N/A
>>> 
>>> We do not understand your question. Can you please clarify?
>>> We would also like to point out that the examples in
>>> this section are expected to be removed altogether in
>>> the next draft.

Can "concatenative-type synthetic speech systems" be simplified as
"concatenating synthetic speech systems"?

>>> Proposed resolution:  Rejected
>>> 
>>> Although your suggested wording reads somewhat better, it
>>> does not have quite the same meaning as the original wording.
>>> We will leave the original wording in place.

Did you mean "Tim Berners-Lee's" or someone else, "Tim Lee's"?
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-speech-synthesis-20021202/

>>> Proposed resolution:  Accepted
>>> 
>>> We will change the name altogether.


Best wishes for your project,
-- 
Susan Lesch           http://www.w3.org/People/Lesch/
mailto:lesch@w3.org               tel:+1.858.483.4819
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)    http://www.w3.org/

Received on Friday, 8 August 2003 20:12:06 UTC