- From: Pawson, David <David.Pawson@rnib.org.uk>
- Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 11:30:51 -0000
- To: "Baggia Paolo" <Paolo.Baggia@LOQUENDO.COM>, <www-voice@w3.org>
- CC: <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>
-----Original Message----- From: Baggia Paolo we just published the first WD. Are you going to comment it too? I'll be very interested to your comments. See: http://www.w3.org/TR/pronunciation-lexicon >From that WD. <quote>In the Pronunciation Lexicon Specification the pronunciation alphabet is specified by the "alphabet" attribute (see Section 4.1 and Section 4.6 for details on the use of this attribute). The only valid values for the "alphabet" attribute are "ipa" (see the next paragraph) and vendor-defined strings of the form "x-organization" or "x-organization-alphabet". </quote> then <quote>A processor should support a value for "alphabet" of "ipa", </quote> Note the 'should'. then <quote>The production of output when other codes are given is entirely at processor discretion.</quote> My interpretation. W3C members and staff are spending time and money on a WD | recommendation which is not going to standardise anything, since the only 'standard' alphabet is optional (a *should*, not a must). Where is the standardisation? Is the intention to standardise the n various alphabets in use by vendors? They equally are optional and presumably have rights tied to them. Is this what W3C are doing? Tell me where my interpretation is wrong please? regards DaveP -- DISCLAIMER: NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient you should not use, disclose, distribute or copy any of the content of it or of any attachment; you are requested to notify the sender immediately of your receipt of the email and then to delete it and any attachments from your system. RNIB endeavours to ensure that emails and any attachments generated by its staff are free from viruses or other contaminants. However, it cannot accept any responsibility for any such which are transmitted. We therefore recommend you scan all attachments. Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email and any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RNIB. RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227 Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk
Received on Thursday, 24 February 2005 11:31:48 UTC