Re: SpeechRecognitionEvent resultIndex / resultHistory

Yes, I propose we rename "resultHistory" to "results".

/Glen Shires

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Jim Barnett <Jim.Barnett@genesyslab.com>wrote:

> Thanks for the clarification - I was confused by the name resultHistory as
> well.  I expected it to refer to some sort of n-best over time, but as I
> looked at the definition, it became clear that it was something like
> “current best interpretation”.    Is ‘resultHistory’ the right name in this
> case? ****
>
> ** **
>
> **-          **Jim****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Young, Milan [mailto:Milan.Young@nuance.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 23, 2012 7:50 PM
> *To:* Glen Shires
> *Cc:* public-speech-api@w3.org
> *Subject:* RE: SpeechRecognitionEvent resultIndex / resultHistory****
>
> ** **
>
> This is a step in the right direction, but I still think the wording for
> resultHistory needs work.  A couple concrete objections:****
>
>   *  The opening sentence is misleading because resultHistory doesn’t
> capture all results in this session, but rather the current best hypothesis
> of results over the session.****
>
>   * You have “the length of the array cannot be less than the
> resultIndex”, but doesn’t it always have to be greater?****
>
> ** **
>
> My last objection is fuzzy: I just found that paragraph hard to read.  I
> think the confusion centered on the use of the word “replaced”.  I found it
> odd because the event is delivering a “free standing” array, not a diff.  I
> understand that the underlying implementation may take a different view,
> but we are describing an API here, not a cookbook for implementers.  I’d be
> happy to suggest an alternative, but being that you and Hans are editors I
> figured I’d give you first shot.****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Glen Shires [mailto:gshires@google.com <gshires@google.com>]
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 23, 2012 2:06 AM
> *To:* Young, Milan
> *Cc:* public-speech-api@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: SpeechRecognitionEvent resultIndex / resultHistory****
>
> ** **
>
> Milan,****
>
> Yes, I agree the wording needs to be clarified.  I also agree that "the
> case of correcting a previous interim while deleting the tail of the result
> list" is a reasonably common operation, and that case can be implemented
> with the following definitions.****
>
> ** **
>
> I propose the following wording for resultHistory:****
>
> ** **
>
>     "The array of all of the recognition results that have so far been
> returned as part of this session. It consists of zero or more final results
> followed by zero or more interim results. On subsequent SpeechRecognitionResultEvent
> events, interim results may be replaced by a newer interim result or by a
> final result. Final results cannot be replaced. All entries for indexes
> less than resultIndex must be identical to the array that was present when
> the last SpeechRecognitionResultEvent was raised.  All array entries for
> indexes equal or greater than resultIndex replace any prior entries that
> were present in the array (if any) when the last
> SpeechRecognitionResultEvent was raised.  The length of the resultHistory
> array may increase or decrease, but cannot be less than resultIndex.****
>
> ** **
>
> I propose the following wording for resultIndex:****
>
>  ****
>
>     "The resultIndex must be set to the lowest index in the resultHistory
> array that has changed. When continuous was false, the resultIndex must
> always be 0."****
>
> ** **
>
> I propose to eliminate the resultdeleted event because it results
> in inconsistent states, and because the above definition of resultHistory
> / resultIndex makes the resultdeleted event superfluous.****
>
> ** **
>
> I propose to eliminate SpeechRecognitionResultEvent.result
> because SpeechRecognitionResultEvent may (and often does) return multiple
> results. The JavaScript author can easily process all new results with code
> such as:****
>
> ** **
>
> for (i = resultIndex;  i < resultHistory.length; ++i) {****
>
>   // process resultHistory[i];****
>
> }****
>
> ** **
>
>
> /Glen Shires****
>
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:31 PM, Young, Milan <Milan.Young@nuance.com>
> wrote:****
>
> I agree with the spirit of the change, but I’m unsure about the wording.**
> **
>
>  ****
>
> The result deleted event says “The resultIndex of this event will be the
> element that was deleted” and your text says “The resultIndex must be set
> to the lowest index in the resultHistory array that has changed.”  This
> combination would seem to preclude the case of correcting a previous
> interim while deleting the tail of the result list, which I would guess is
> a reasonably common operation.****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> *From:* Glen Shires [mailto:gshires@google.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 21, 2012 8:09 AM
> *To:* public-speech-api@w3.org
> *Subject:* SpeechRecognitionEvent resultIndex / resultHistory****
>
>  ****
>
> As speech is processed, typically a portion of (but not all of) the
> interim results become final.  As portions become final, the interim
> hypotheses typically also change.  For example, the following sequence
> might occur. (Each line below represents one point in time.)****
>
>  ****
>
> interim: "Tube"****
>
>  ****
>
> interim: "To be born"****
>
>  ****
>
> interim: "To be or not to be"****
>
>  ****
>
> final: "To be"  interim: " or not to be there"****
>
>  ****
>
> final: "To be"  final: " or not to be"  interim: " that is"****
>
>  ****
>
> final: "To be"  final: " or not to be"  interim: " that is"  interim " the
> question"****
>
>  ****
>
> final: "To be"  final: " or not to be"  final: " that is the"  interim: "
> question what"****
>
>  ****
>
> final: "To be"  final: " or not to be"  final: " that is the"  final: "
> question."  interim: " Weather today"****
>
>  ****
>
> final: "To be"  final: " or not to be"  final: " that is the"  final: "
> question."  interim: " Whether tis nobler"****
>
>  ****
>
> final: "To be"  final: " or not to be"  final: " that is the"  final: "
> question."  final: " Whether"  interim: " tis nobler"****
>
>  ****
>
> final: "To be"  final: " or not to be"  final: " that is the"  final: "
> question."  final: " Whether"  final: " tis nobler"****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> Our current spec doesn't support such simultaneous changes to both interim
> and final results. Instead, each SpeechRecognitionEvent returns only a
> single "final" or a single "interim" result.  I propose a simple change to
> enable SpeechRecognitionEvent to return multiple "final" and "interim"
> events. I believe this has the following advantages:****
>
>  ****
>
> - Provides more accurate results (it avoids inconsistent states in which
> the "final" has been returned but the "interim" has not yet been updated).
> ****
>
>  ****
>
> - Provides more efficient processing (it reduces the number of events that
> JavaScript needs to respond to and, more importantly, it avoids the UI
> rendering of those inconsistent states).****
>
>  ****
>
> - It simplifies the JavaScript coding (by not having to detect or
> compensate for inconsistent states).****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> Therefore, I propose a slight re-definition of resultIndex:****
>
>  ****
>
>     "The resultIndex must be set to the lowest index in
> the resultHistory array that has changed.  Entries at greater indexes in
> the resultHistory array (if any) may also have changed."****
>
>  ****
>
> followed by the rest of the existing definition of resultIndex:****
>
>  ****
>
>     "The resultIndex may refer to a previous occupied array index from a
> previous SpeechRecognitionResultEvent. When this is the case this new
> result overwrites the earlier result and is a more accurate result;
> however, when this is the case the previous value must not have been a
> final result. When continuous was false, the resultIndex must always be 0."
> ****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> And a slight re-definition of resultHistory:****
>
>  ****
>
>     "The array of all of the recognition results that have been returned
> as part of this session. All entries for indexes less than resultIndex must
> be identical to the array that was present when the last
> SpeechRecognitionResultEvent was raised.****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> To illustrate, the fourth line in our example above would return
> the SpeechRecognitionResultEvent with****
>
>   resultIndex = 0****
>
>   resultHistory[0] = "To be", final = true,   resultHistory[1] = " or not
> to be there", final = false ****
>
>  ****
>
> and the the fifth line in our example above would return the
> SpeechRecognitionResultEvent with****
>
>   resultIndex = 1****
>
>   resultHistory[0] = "To be", final = true,   resultHistory[1] = " or not
> to be", final = true,   resultHistory[2] = " that is", final = false****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> /Glen Shires****
>
>  ****
>
> ** **
>