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

RE: Revised SpeechRecognitionResult

From: Young, Milan <Milan.Young@nuance.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 17:13:36 +0000
To: Hans Wennborg <hwennborg@google.com>
CC: "public-speech-api@w3.org" <public-speech-api@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B236B24082A4094A85003E8FFB8DDC3C1A45C7C8@SOM-EXCH04.nuance.com>
Hello Hans, 

Yes, my "event" terminology maps to your "exception".  I prefer "exception".

By true alias, I mean that the implementing browser could simply rewrite "result.confidence" as "result.item[0].confidence" without worry for generating an out of bounds exception.  Perhaps a minor point, but as one who has written a browser, I consider these sorts of edge cases.

In any case, it looks like we are in agreement.


-----Original Message-----
From: Hans Wennborg [mailto:hwennborg@google.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 4:11 AM
To: Young, Milan
Cc: public-speech-api@w3.org
Subject: Re: Revised SpeechRecognitionResult

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 17:14:05 UTC

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