EVEN MORE URGENT: esp Mark H & John

From: Sarah Hawkins (sh110@cam.ac.uk)
Date: Sat Nov 25 2000 - 17:58:34 GMT

  • Next message: John Local: "Re: EVEN MORE URGENT: esp Mark H & John"

    This is getting more and more confusing. I thought that (the revised,
    July-ish) ProXML would do everything that pro(c)sy needs, but later, I
    thought I understood from MarkW that ProXML currently will not do
    everything that pro(C)sy needs it to.
      I therefore thought that that issue must have been discussed, and
    MarkW's view confirmed, in the meeting of the two Marks in early November.
     If MarkW is right, then I think that the answer to MarkH's question
    (below) re "what the disadvantages of switching to ProXML are" is "if it
    ain't broke, don't fix it, especially if fixing it takes time and
    provides no advantage beyond it looking neater."
     If MarkH still thinks that ProXML does do everything that's needed, then
    we have differing opinions between the two people most qualified to judge.
    So, could the two Marks please have another discussion, as a matter of
    urgency? The phone will do, I think. I can be involved in a three-way call
    as necessary. MarkW will be at work next Thurs and Fri.

    This issue *must* be resolved immediately. We are already falling behind
    schedule.

    MarkH, it seems possible that I have misunderstood something. Equally,
    could you have, for example re what HLsyn needs as input? Please do give
    me a call ASAP if you think I can resolve anything before next Thursday.
    Home phone: 01954 210181.

    best wishes
    Sarah

    On Fri, 24 Nov 2000, Mark Huckvale wrote:

    > At 15:23 24/11/00 +0000, you wrote:
    > > Below is a text mainly written by Mark W. It basically asks "is it
    > >worthwhile to rewrite Pro(c)sy?"
    >
    > I don't see any sensible alternative to writing PROSY in ProXML
    > at the moment. The alternatives are to stick with Python which
    > doesn't integrate with our XML structure very well, or to switch
    > to a third different scripting language.
    >
    > I think there is a debate about whether it is worth while making
    > PROCSY "stand alone" so that you wouldn't need to use ProSynth
    > prosodic structures:- it might be useful for other people working
    > in speech perception.
    >
    > I would like to hear someone describe what the disadvantages of
    > changing to ProXML are.
    >
    > Mark
    >
    >

    Sarah

    _____________________________________________________________________

     Dr. Sarah Hawkins Email: sh110@cam.ac.uk
     Dept. of Linguistics Phone: +44 1223 33 50 52
     University of Cambridge Fax: +44 1223 33 50 53
     Sidgwick Avenue or +44 1223 33 50 62
     Cambridge CB3 9DA
     United Kingdom



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Nov 25 2000 - 17:59:14 GMT