W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-speech-api@w3.org > June 2012

Re: EMMA in Speech API (was RE: Speech API: first editor's draft posted)

From: Hans Wennborg <hwennborg@google.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 10:04:12 +0100
Message-ID: <CAB8jPhd+6Coj4Mhma42rUCHo82fFXFqLByaHSUAY_SW1GEG=Og@mail.gmail.com>
To: Satish S <satish@google.com>
Cc: olli@pettay.fi, "Young, Milan" <Milan.Young@nuance.com>, Deborah Dahl <dahl@conversational-technologies.com>, Bjorn Bringert <bringert@google.com>, Glen Shires <gshires@google.com>, "public-speech-api@w3.org" <public-speech-api@w3.org>
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:31 AM, Satish S <satish@google.com> wrote:
> In any case, looks like there is enough interest both from speech & browser
> vendors to have this attribute always non-null. So I'm fine making it so. I
> like the first proposal from Milan:
> ----
> Addition to SpeechRecognitionResult (section 5.1)
>
>  readonly attribute DOMString emma;
>
> And the corresponding addition to 5.1.6:
>  emma - A string representation of the XML-based <link>EMMA 1.0</link>
> result. (link points to http://www.w3.org/TR/emma/
> ----
>
> This spec proposal shouldn't mandate specific fields any more than what EMMA
> does already so that web apps can point to existing recognizers and get EMMA
> data in the same format as they would get otherwise.

Earlier in the thread, I thought we decided that it was better to make
the emma attribute be of type Document rather than DOMString?
Received on Friday, 8 June 2012 09:05:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 8 June 2012 09:05:07 GMT