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

Re: Revised SpeechRecognitionResult

From: Satish S <satish@google.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 15:43:26 +0100
Message-ID: <CAHZf7R=Z8U22piDJOQL7W9J1FYPyU7ZuHd5fn9bX66ffvcDHLQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Young, Milan" <Milan.Young@nuance.com>
Cc: Hans Wennborg <hwennborg@google.com>, "public-speech-api@w3.org" <public-speech-api@w3.org>
> Id argue that 90% of developers will not even think about the second item
> on the nbest list.  So why complicate their mental model let alone syntax
> with SpeechRecogntionAlternatives?

In another thread you mentioned "I want to be careful not to dumb it down
to the point where we impact the mainstream speech industry". The above
statement seems to contradict that. We should realise developers are smart
and would have no problem understanding speech primitives. Also I don't
understand how adding more attributes for accessing the same data and
making an API with a larger surface area simplifies the mental model for

This is similar to the proposal for adding emmaXml and emmaText - where the
suggestion is to just add emmaXml and let developers generate the text
format if required. Lets not add multiple attributes for accessing the same

Received on Wednesday, 30 May 2012 14:43:57 UTC

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