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

Re: Default value of SpeechRecognition.grammars

From: Satish S <satish@google.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 17:31:01 +0100
Message-ID: <CAHZf7RnJJTyNE-ayBgs6=QppGhsCwuNCFnOVqMdTAoocT6SVNA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jerry Carter <jerry@jerrycarter.org>
Cc: "Young, Milan" <Milan.Young@nuance.com>, Hans Wennborg <hwennborg@google.com>, "public-speech-api@w3.org" <public-speech-api@w3.org>
Looks good. Should this go into a non-normative section?

Cheers
Satish


On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Jerry Carter <jerry@jerrycarter.org> wrote:

>
> The challenge, here, is terminology.  I agree that your scenario is valid
> and regret that my choice of words is inadequate to express our agreement.
>  Let me offer this language:
>
> "The recognition service is expected to provide, as a default, a general
> purpose grammar for common utterances.  The capabilities of this grammar
> and the domains covered will vary according to the capabilities of the
> current recognition service.  Application developers who want to ensure
> coverage for specific utterances are encouraged to specify either a
> specific recognition service or a specific grammar."
>
> Better?
>
> -=- Jerry
>
>
> On Jun 20, 2012, at 12:14 PM, Satish S wrote:
>
> Shouldn't that be up to the UA to decide? One use case is if the device
> did not have access to a recognizer capable of dictation-lite (e.g.
> recognizer is remote and device has no network access at that moment) the
> UA can decide to only use a local recognizer capable of recognizing names
> from the contact list or apps installed and nothing else.
>
> Cheers
> Satish
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Jerry Carter <jerry@jerrycarter.org>wrote:
>
>> I concur that web search is inappropriate, but the specification should
>> provide some expectation as to what the default grammar might be.
>>
>> If you want the default grammar to be of any general use, it would need
>> to support common words & phrases for the current locality.  It need not be
>> as rich as a dedicated dictation grammar or support utterances as long as
>> for diction tasks (though it could be).  But I would expect a
>> 'dictation-lite'.
>>
>> -=- Jerry
>>
>> On Jun 20, 2012, at 11:53 AM, Satish S wrote:
>>
>> The vast majority of web apps using speech API wouldn't be doing web
>> search with the result so it would be good to not mention it in the spec.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Satish
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Young, Milan <Milan.Young@nuance.com>wrote:
>>
>>> I also support the idea of the engine choosing behavior when no grammars
>>> are present.  But it would be nice to put in the spec a few examples of
>>> what that default might be.  Dictation and web search seem like good hints.
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Hans Wennborg [mailto:hwennborg@google.com]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 8:27 AM
>>> To: Jerry Carter
>>> Cc: public-speech-api@w3.org
>>> Subject: Re: Default value of SpeechRecognition.grammars
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Jerry Carter <jerry@jerrycarter.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Makes sense. I assume you are thinking that the default grammar should
>>> be fairly broad, e.g. a dictation grammar.
>>>
>>> Yes, but I don't think we should specify what the default grammar should
>>> be; it should be decided by the speech recognition engine.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Hans
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2012 16:31:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 20 June 2012 16:31:36 GMT