Return-Path: X-Original-To: tools-discuss@mail2.ietf.org Delivered-To: tools-discuss@mail2.ietf.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3502F80BB719 for ; Sun, 2 Nov 2025 09:47:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S4dMVWHP07ie for ; Sun, 2 Nov 2025 09:47:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from bsa2.jck.com (bsa2.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5488080BB711 for ; Sun, 2 Nov 2025 09:47:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1vFcAV-000DVJ-HC; Sun, 02 Nov 2025 12:47:07 -0500 Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2025 12:47:00 -0500 From: John C Klensin To: Marc Petit-Huguenin , Kyle Rose Message-ID: <56C06C1CDFEB940091AFF942@PSB> In-Reply-To: References: <94CA951C-C908-428F-938F-CF54CA3CBDFC@ietf.org> X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Message-ID-Hash: 7M2OH2KWC2CPWQ4P3KIUJT2ESEHLUNE5 X-Message-ID-Hash: 7M2OH2KWC2CPWQ4P3KIUJT2ESEHLUNE5 X-MailFrom: john-ietf@jck.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tools-discuss.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: Tools Team Discussion X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6 Precedence: list Subject: =?utf-8?q?=5BTools-discuss=5D_Re=3A_A_=22pronunciation=22_resource=3F?= List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: --On Sunday, November 2, 2025 09:15 -0800 Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote: > On 11/2/25 8:55 AM, Kyle Rose wrote: >> On Sun, Nov 2, 2025 at 11:35=E2=80=AFAM Marc Petit-Huguenin >> wrote: >>=20 >>> Storing the pronunciation in, say, IPA does not require to >>> already know the English pronunciation of everything: /ma=C9=BEk >>> p=C9=99ti-yg=C9=99n=C9=9B=CC=83/ >>=20 >>=20 >> No, it only requires you to know IPA, which probably far fewer = IETF >> participants know than the pronunciation of basic English words. I >> took linguistics in college, too... 31 years ago. Fuck if I can >> remember any of that. >>=20 >> If IPA is the preference, please provide a tool that speaks the >> IPA. >=20 >=20 > https://ipa-reader.com/ Marc, Sure (and thanks). But now I have to wonder (and I don't have an answer) which of the following options would be less bad: (1) Expect a significant fraction of IETF participants to learn IPA, at least to the extent of writing their own names, and supply help for those participants who don't/ can't _and_ expect those who want/need the pronunciation information to either master IPA or utilize a tool like this. or (2) Jay's question and implicit suggestion of having participates record their own pronunciation of their names and storing the consequent audio clip in the datatracker. I like the idea of having pronunciation information available, but neither of the above feels really attractive. john