[pls] About I18N comments

Dear Richard and Felix,

In March 2006 you sent us the 36 comments [1] on the PLS LCWD [2] 
and in the following months we discussed all of them. 
More recently in October 2006, the VBWG decided to re-publish the 
PLS as second LCWD to close all the major issues and it was
public since October 26 [3]. The PLS specification links the current
Disposition of Comments [4] document which lists all the comments
received (including your 36 comments) and the dispositions.

Being that the review period of [3] is closed since November 26,
we would like to solicit you and I18N to close all the pending
issues. We would like to work fast to define an Impl. Report Plan
and to move to CR.

The pending issues are only 7, see below and other 2 were set
Implicitly Accepted, because you agreed on the resolution, but in
the meantime you were asking some changes. We would prefer to
have an explicit acceptance or further comments to properly close
all the issues. 

Please do not answer to this email with resolutions, but reply
to the original email trail (see below for each single comment).

***
Please indicate before 15 December 2006 whether you are satisfied 
with the VBWG's resolution listed in [4], whether you think there
has been a misunderstanding, or whether you wish to register an 
objection.

If you do not think you can respond before 15 December, please let 
me know. However, if we do not hear from you at all by 15 December 
2006, we will assume that you accept our resolutions.
***

Paolo Baggia, editor PLS spec.

==========
List of the issues - Waiting Answer (see [4])
==========
R103-4:
Resolution: Accepted

- Trouble with the Schema.
- We Accepted your comment and then the Schema was fixed and
  the Spec clarified.
- Felix said: "I am happy with your resolution, but would also 
  like to see the new schema / the new text."

+ E-mail Trail
- Original Comment Richard Ishida (2006-03-21)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006JanMar/0063.html
- VBWG official response to last call issue VBWG (2006-05-26) 
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0054.html
- Comment to VBWG official response Felix Sasaki (2006-05-27)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0089.html

==========
R103-7:
Resolution: Accepted

- You asked: "Please make it clearer, throughout the document, when 
  talking about multiple instances of grapheme or phoneme, whether 
  this is useful for speech synthesis or speech recognition."
- We asked you specific points to be clarified.
- No answer
- Not sure if the comments still applies to the second LCWD [3]

+ E-mail Trail
- Original Comment Richard Ishida (2006-03-21)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006JanMar/0066.html 
- VBWG asks for clarification to last call issue VBWG (2006-05-26)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0057.html 

==========
R103-20:
Resolution: Accepted

- Request to reference: "RFC3066 or its successors"
- Discussion on the right reference.
- [3] includes a version you suggested. 
- If it is fine, please send final acceptance

+ E-mail Trail
- Original Comment Richard Ishida (2006-03-21) 
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006JanMar/0079.html 
- VBWG official response to last call issue VBWG (2006-05-26) 
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0085.html 
- Comment to VBWG official response Richard Ishida (2006-07-28)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006JulSep/0027.html 

==========
R103-21:
Resolution: Rejected

- Request: "How is dc:language="en-US" meant to be interpreted 
  if it appears in a metadata element? How does it affect 
  the xml:lang declaration on PLS elements?"
- We rejected it, because: "We do not see any relationship 
  between the two declarations. The attribute xml:lang is 
  mandatory in PLS and dc:language will be ignored."
- No answer

+ E-mail Trail
- Original Comment Richard Ishida (2006-03-21) 
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006JanMar/0080.html 
- VBWG official response to last call issue VBWG (2006-05-26) 
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0070.html 

==========
R103-30:
Resolution: Rejected

- You asked to add markup in the example element.
- We rejected it with motivations.
- No answer

+ E-mail Trail
- Original Comment Richard Ishida (2006-03-21) 
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006JanMar/0089.html 
- VBWG official response to last call issue VBWG (2006-05-26)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0075.html 

==========
R103-35:
Resolution: Accepted

- You asked clarification on Section 5.5.
- We suggested that issue R103-36 will significantly change Section 5.5.
  We will propose new wording (now in [3])and we will welcome your
review.
- You answered to be happy to review.

+ E-mail Trail
- Original Comment Richard Ishida (2006-03-21) 
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006JanMar/0094.html 
- VBWG official response to last call issue VBWG (2006-05-26) 
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0080.html 
- Comments to VBWG official response Richard Ishida (2006-06-14)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0127.html 

==========
R103-36:
Resolution: Accepted

- You asked to solve the Homograph disambiguation issue.
- We proposed a mechanism in [3]
- You should review it.
- Other groups asked to change that mechanism and our solution
  seems to be fine for them.

+ E-mail Trail
- Original Comment Richard Ishida (2006-03-21) 
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006JanMar/0095.html 
- VBWG official response to last call issue VBWG (2006-05-26)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0082.html 
- Comment to VBWG official response Richard Ishida (2006-06-14)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0126.html 


==========
List of the issues - Implicitly Accepted (see [4])
==========
R103-26:
Resolution: Accepted

- Asked clarification on TTS and ASR in Section 4.5 [2]
- We clarified the issue and rejected your comment.
- You asked us to see comments at [5]
- You should clarify if you accept our resolution, see also
  Section 4.5 [3]

+ E-mail Trail
- Original Comment Richard Ishida (2006-03-21)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006JanMar/0085.html 
- VBWG official response to last call issue VBWG (2006-05-26)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0072.html 
- Comments to VBWG official response Richard Ishida (2006-06-14)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0119.html 

==========
R103-33:
Resolution: Accepted

- Asked clarification on TTS and ASR in Section 5.4 [2]
- We accepted your comment with modification and added
  clarifications in the spec

+ E-mail Trail
- Original Comment Richard Ishida (2006-03-21)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006JanMar/0092.html 
- VBWG official response to last call issue VBWG (2006-05-26)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0078.html 
- Comment to VBWG official response Richard Ishida (2006-06-14)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0118.html 
- VBWG updated official response to last call issue VBWG (2006-07-28)
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006JulSep/0024.html 

===========
References:

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006JanMar/0096.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-pronunciation-lexicon-20060131/ 
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-pronunciation-lexicon-20061026/ 
[4] http://www.w3.org/TR/pronunciation-lexicon/pls-disp.html 
[5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2006AprJun/0118.html 


Gruppo Telecom Italia - Direzione e coordinamento di Telecom Italia S.p.A.

================================================
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons above and 
may contain confidential information. If you have received the message in 
error, be informed that any use of the content hereof is prohibited. Please 
return it immediately to the sender and delete the message. Should you have any 
questions, please send an e_mail to 
<mailto:webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Thank 
you<http://www.loquendo.com>www.loquendo.com
================================================