- From: Eira Monstad <eiram@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 15:23:57 +0200
- To: www-voice@w3.org
- Cc: chaals@opera.com
I'm delighted to see that the promised say-as note has finally been released ( http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/NOTE-ssml-sayas-20050526/ ) Some input: Date: "The same character must be used to delimit all fields in a date string." At least in Norwegian, dates are commonly written as d/m-y or d/m -y. How should these dates be handled? When a number is both an ordinal and a date (as in Friday the 27.), do you recommend marking it up as an ordinal number or a date? What kind of markup would you suggest for dates like "May 27, 2005" or "May 27th, 2005"? Time: Hours are restricted to 0-23. In Norwegian, and probably other languages as well, 24 is often used instead of 00. The introduction to the format attribute for time states that "At least one separator character must be supported: the colon (:)." However, under the heading "Basic tokens of a time string", you find "[Time Field Separator] colon (':') , dot ('.'), or empty string ("")" In an international perspective, it would make sense that support for all these three is required. Fixing this inconsistency in the text should be simple. The list of allowed qualifiers is very specific. However, in some languages the qualifiers are translated and thus will not conform to the list. Additionally, especially in older texts, a.m. and p.m. are often mispunctuated, missing the last dot. Some languages' ortographic conventions may even allow omitting the trailing dot in abbreviations. How should conforming synthesis processors be expected to handle these cases? Character string: Have you considered a need/use for a way to group a longer digit string into shorter but still complex numbers? E.g. reading 123456 as "twelve thirtyfour fiftysix". Could this be achieved in an elegant way with an extension to the character format attribute? Currently, two values are allowed: "glyphs" and "characters". With a third value, "complex", the processor could use the grouping defined in the detail attribute to build complex numbers where possible. If detail is undefined, the value of "complex" should probably be ignored and fallback to the default value. General: The SSML spec says: "The detail attribute is an optional attribute that indicates the level of detail to be read aloud or rendered. Every value of the detail attribute must render all of the informational content in the contained text; however, specific values for the detail attribute can be used to render content that is not usually informational in running text but may be important to render for specific purposes. For example, a synthesis processor will usually render punctuations through appropriate changes in prosody. Setting a higher level of detail may be used to speak punctuations explicitly, e.g. for reading out coded part numbers or pieces of software code." However, in the say-as note, detail seems to be used to indicate grouping, not level of detail. The way the detail attribute is used in the say-as note, it specifies *where* the prosody changes / punctuation reading should take place, but not the level of detail it should be spoken with. Does the group have any input on this? And one last question: Have you considered the need for other categories, such as fractions? I'd be interested in hearing about how you decided what to put on the list and what not to put on it. -- Eira Monstad Core QA
Received on Saturday, 28 May 2005 08:01:47 UTC