W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > April to June 2004

RE: Comments for CR-speech-synthesis-20031218

From: Daniel Burnett <burnett@nuance.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 08:38:45 -0700
Message-ID: <ED834EE1FDD6C3468AB0F5569206E6E9059EF248@MPB1EXCH02.nuance.com>
To: "Susan Lesch" <lesch@w3.org>
Cc: <www-voice@w3.org>


The Voice Browser Working Group has requested that I ask you for an explicit acceptance
of our resolutions.  If our resolutions below are acceptable to you, could you please
reply to this message (including www-voice@w3.org in your reply) with an explicit

Thank you,

Dan Burnett

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Burnett 
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 9:29 AM
To: 'Susan Lesch'; www-voice@w3.org
Subject: RE: Comments for CR-speech-synthesis-20031218


Thank you for your comments.  Our responses are embedded below, preceded by "DB>>".
If you have any concerns with our responses, please let us know.  If we do not hear
from you within two weeks of today we will assume that you have accepted our
resolutions.  Once again, thank you for your interest in and continued careful
review of our specification.

Dan Burnett
Synthesis subgroup chair
Voice Browser Working Group

-----Original Message-----
From: www-voice-request@w3.org [mailto:www-voice-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of Susan Lesch
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 10:53 PM
To: www-voice@w3.org
Subject: Comments for CR-speech-synthesis-20031218


Two comments for your "Speech Synthesis Markup Language Version 1.0"
Candidate Recommendation [1].

The document is served ISO-8859-1 as far as I can tell from .htaccess
but the change notes say "Changed examples to use utf-8." So somewhere
in production there is an encoding mismatch. For example:


looks like this:


looks like this:

DB>> The original document was in UTF-8, but an error occurred
DB>> somewhere in the publication process. It is our understanding
DB>> that all specifications are now being served in UTF-8, so this
DB>> should not be a problem for the Proposed Recommendation and
DB>> Recommendation documents.

These caps can be lowercase to match your RFC 2119 convention:

     the processor MUST render
     The processor SHOULD also
     text MUST be rendered

But because of this use of must:

     Defining a comprehensive set of text format types is difficult
     because of the variety of languages that must be considered and
     because of the innate flexibility of written languages.

RFC 2119 markup would help. There is example XHTML and CSS in the
Manual of Style (can be adapted): http://www.w3.org/2001/06/manual/#RFC

DB>> We will convert the three keyword instances you list to lower case.
DB>> We will change the offending "must" to "have to" in the sentence
DB>> you quote.
DB>> Thank you for the style suggestion. We may or may not implement
DB>> this, as time permits.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-speech-synthesis-20031218/

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, 11 June 2004 11:39:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:03:49 UTC