[EAS] Why we need Text-To-Speech

[Alex Hartman]

How hard is it to write into the rules "TTS engine must be
user-programmable for local lexicon insertion up to 100,000 words"?

Pretty much tells the manufacturers what they can and cannot use.

That's entirely possible. A TTS engine doesn't take much space, and
the lexicon file is actually pretty small (under 100Mbytes) for the
typical TTS engine.

Saying that local lexicon insertion from the manufacturers is a
flat-out lie IMO. It's software. Just because they might not want to
do it, or it raises their overhead, so be it. Wanna play the game,
play by the rules.

--
Alex Hartman

On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Harold Price
<hprice at sagealertingsystems.com> wrote:
> There is little chance that this is possible.  The different vendors
> use different hardware, software, and operating systems.
>
> That doesn't mean that we can't strive to make sure that, as far as
> possible, the timing and pacing, if adjustable, can be made user
> selectable, standard abbreviations are used, etc.
>
> Harold
>
> At 03:11 PM 3/19/2012, Skinner, Jim wrote:
>>Question for ECIG:
>>
>>It would be nice if all the EAS companies could use the same
>>Text-to-Speech software.  Then 100 local versions around the country
>>could be programmed up by people appointed by the LECCs and SECCs.  Even
>>stations and cable owned and operated by far away companies could load
>>the "Local Dialect" version of TTS and away we go!
>>
>>I know that sounds like a pipe dream, but why not talk about that as a
>>goal?
>>
>>   --
>>Jim Skinner CPBE CBNT
>>Neb SECC Chair
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>