- 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