[EAS] Test-To-Speech must be allowed - NOW!

[Ed Czarnecki]

Tom - Well, I'll take your question as a thought exercise.

Could the EB cite someone?  Not sure yet, since we're headed into some
uncharted territory, the rules have not yet been published, and the EB
hasn't reviewed them in terms of how they could be enforced..  But, on the
other hand, why wouldn't an inspector write up a station if they noticed (or
got a complaint) about TTS usage if it was supposedly prohibited?  **
Especially if they got a complaint.   And was seen as willful and repeated
(a favorite phrase of the EB).

Just look at Barry Mishkind's EAS violations page.
(http://www.thebdr.net/articles/fcc/insp/EW.html)  Some of the enforcement
actions are pretty blatant.  And some seem downright trivial.  The idea of
enabling text-to-speech on an FCC regulated EAS device, in defiance of a
specific FCC ruling, would seem to at least raise the spectre.

Not having TTS does not prevent use of the CAP EAS equipment.  It does make
it more complex ... and bandwidth intensive.  If the consuming device cannot
generate TTS, then the origination side of the system would need to adapt by
generating its own audio file.  The CAP message would then either (a)
contain a resource destination (URL) where an audio .mp3 file would be
polled by the receiver or (b) the audio file would be pushed downstream
along with the CAP message to the receiver.  

True that IPAWS does not support audio files, nor the weather service.  And
that's a big problem, since the Fifth R&O is principally about IPAWS CAP
dissemination. True that neither does Washington, and that is troublesome as
well.  However, 18-20+ states do use systems that will use method (b)
pushing the audio file downstream, along with (a) hosting an audio file.
Several other states are in the process of procuring systems that can also
support audio file hosting.

But, what this does NOT address is what happens if that audio file is
missing or corrupted.  Even with audio files, I see TTS as an essential
backup capability (at a minimum) in the event there is a problem accessing
the MP3 file.  And that to me is a very, very significant issue.

-----Original Message-----
From: eas-bounces at radiolists.net [mailto:eas-bounces at radiolists.net] On
Behalf Of Tom Taggart

ED:

Yea, "technical" violation of part 11. Are they going to cite someone for
using it?  Just about invites someone like me to stand up at the next NAB
and pin  the FCC dodo to wall on why we should buy this expensive equipment
if they are not going to let anyone use it.

Nothing gets through to these idiots like being publicly embarrassed.

_______________________________________________
This is the EAS Forum Discussion List

Please invite your friends to join our Forum!
http://lists.radiolists.net/mailman/listinfo/eas

And, remember the main page: http://eas.radiolists.net