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

Re: Revised SpeechRecognitionResult

From: Hans Wennborg <hwennborg@google.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 12:11:28 +0100
Message-ID: <CAB8jPhfc37yWhz_+0KhRjrctn3qMOwAYoOXhURzuHjA+J4j+fg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Young, Milan" <Milan.Young@nuance.com>
Cc: "public-speech-api@w3.org" <public-speech-api@w3.org>
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Young, Milan <Milan.Young@nuance.com> wrote:
> Hello Hans,
> It's not uncommon for recognition engines to return a guess at what the user said/meant even for a nomatch result.  So we shouldn't rule this out in the API.

Right. The spec currently says "nomatch event: [...] The result field
in the event may contain speech recognition results that are below the
confidence threshold or may be null."

So that covers both cases.

> As far as communicating this with a null vs event, I have a slight preference for an event.  Two reasons:

I'm not sure what you mean by "communication this with a null vs
event". I was talking about returning null or throwing an exception.
Is that what you mean?

>  * Easier for implementers.  This is a true alias.

I'm not sure what you mean by true alias.

>  * We may want to allow empty interpretations or utterances, and thus a null would be ambiguous.

Ah, yes. So throwing an exception seems like the better option.

Received on Wednesday, 23 May 2012 11:12:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:02:26 UTC