Spoken Pronunciation Task Force Teleconference

31 March 2021


ADR, ADR_, Dee, Irfan, janina, JF, mhakkinen, NeilS, paul_grenier, Roy, SteveNoble, SteveNoble_, Tom_Babinszki
Irfan Ali

Meeting minutes


First Public Working Draft: Specification for Spoken Presentation document CFC

Irfan: We made changes. Sent to Becky who has more recommendations. Add more background, examples, etc. Irfan made changes and sent back to Becky.

Irfan: Change name, short URL needed.

Irfan: Current Name is Technical Approach

<Roy> Pronunciation-in-html


Mark: Spoken HTML or HTML Spoken

Neil: prefer Spoken HTML

Irfan: Spoken-HTML?

<Roy> spoken-html

<Roy> +1

Consensus is Spoken-HTML

<Irfan> https://w3c.github.io/pronunciation/technical-approach/#abstract

Irfan: There was limited information. Irfan added a paragraph.

Janina: no consistent approach that can be relied on across browsers

Consistent approach that can be relied on across user agents (browsers, assistive technologies, voice assistants, etc.)

Neil: we make some assumptions that SSML is not the solution. In the into we have to say why.

Mark: pull out the info from the gap analysis.

Janina: add as a second paragraph to abstract

Neil: later on have more explanantion

Irfan: background, second section, provides some information

Neil: nothing says that all of SSML is not needed. Need to say why we are using the subset.

Janina: will write a draft

Janina: we need a gentle way to say that browsers didn't implement SSML

Mark: gap analysis indicates has the "why'

Irfan: Status to be updated by Roy

Irfan: Intro has been updated. Included feedback. Do we need to do anything more?

Irfan: Background section, adding more info to Abstract, only other concern, examples in section 3

Irfan: Content not sufficient. We need to add some details about the approach.

Irfan: Need to add info for those who do not understand SSML

Mark: Gap analysis has description of functional areas

Irfan: do we need to add info directly or just refer to the Gap Analysis document?

Janina: if it helps, keep it in document, hyperlink is for knowing more.

Janina: document itself needs to provide understanding

Irfan: it appears we need to restructure the section and add info from Gap Analysis.

Mark: each attribute section or add a simplified version of section 2 of gap analysis?

Janina: the simplified content

Irfan: The third paragraph -- the sentence starts with the example. Do we need more explanation?

Mark: we don't need to explain all the features, that is done my SSML spec.

Irfan: What would make it more clear to readers who do not understand SSML?

Mark: suggest adding a new section before the current section 3 which is drawn from categories..

Neil: this goes back to the gap analysis

Irfan: I will update document and then share.

Irfan: Another point, data-SSML-say as-*, could use a better description

Irfan: some attributes are in SSML 1.0 but not in SSML 1.1. We may need to reference SSML 1.0.

Mark: The say-as is in 1.0. That can be cleaned up.

Irfan: Can someone review that?

Neil: The example is not correct.

Irfan: we need to fix the digit example.

Neil: I will take another look at section 3.

Irfan: Send an email with feedback.

Mark: some discussion about including audio files, not convinced that they need to be there.

Mark: best to send people to the test cases to evaluate with their own systhesizers

Mark: we want to be vendor neutral

Neil: saw a difference between section 3 an 4 for interpret-as.

Mark: rational that is not explained, in JSON model it is more of a direct mapping.

Irfan: Let Neil summarize all the info in an email.

Irfan: Single attribute approach, no feedback, unless Mark thinks we are missing something.

Mark: I don't think so.

Irfan: Pros and cons, not sufficient, need more information

Irfan: It appears clear to me what we are trying to do.

Irfan: any other ideas?

Irfan: We will stay with what we have.

Irfan: Next steps, abstract (Janina), add/update 2.2 2.3 to background (Irfan, Mark to review), Sections 3 and 4 (Neil), Roy will update status and short name, Technical consideration (no changes)

Irfan: Timeline, I will be able to finish by Friday, 4/2.

Janina: Will finish tomorrow.

Neil: today or tomorrow

Irfan: By next week we should have an updated doc

Irfan: anything else?

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 127 (Wed Dec 30 17:39:58 2020 UTC).


No scribenick or scribe found. Guessed: Dee

Maybe present: Mark, Neil