W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > January to March 2005

RE: [pls] Invitation letter for WAI/I18N/MMI people interested on Pronunciation Lexicon spec

From: Pawson, David <David.Pawson@rnib.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 11:30:51 -0000
Message-ID: <47DFC5E9D8B9E4429C2861946386EA9901E9B637@pbrmsx01.ads.rnib.org.uk>
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>


<quote>A processor should support a value for "alphabet" of "ipa", </quote>
Note the 'should'.


<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


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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:03:50 UTC