A little. It would possibly help to cool the air by referring to the proposal
as 'the "simple definition" from the T.E.O. group at the Katholique University
of Leuven in Belgium', or whatever, rather than the 'proposal from Europe'
which implies a wider consensus than actually exists.
> I'm completely bemused by the assertion at the end that states
> "not many people can afford expensive devices so we are making a simple one"
I agree that their assertion is not only unhelpful, but also demonstrably
incorrect. I also agree that a solution which lies much closer to your
initial proposal is likely to be more useful and also will provide a better
match to existing hardware.
On the other hand I agree with the T.E.O. group regarding some of their
detailed points. Sound level for example cannot readily or accurately be
specified in dB - at what distance from the source? Is it in an anechoic
environment? and so on. Further, it is desirable to use the same stylesheet
in different situations. The SPL required to generate say 90bB at 1 metre
would be too loud for a pair of headphones and too soft for a demonstration
in a moderate sized lecture hall.
I am working on a modified proposal which adresses these points.
-- Chris Lilley, Technical Author and JISC representative to W3C +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Manchester and North Training & Education Centre ( MAN T&EC ) | +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Computer Graphics Unit, Email: Chris.Lilley@mcc.ac.uk | | Manchester Computing Centre, Voice: +44 161 275 6045 | | Oxford Road, Manchester, UK. Fax: +44 161 275 6040 | | M13 9PL BioMOO: ChrisL | | Timezone: UTC URI: http://info.mcc.ac.uk/CGU/staff/lilley/ | +-------------------------------------------------------------------+