W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: Speech API Community Group

From: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2012 15:39:09 -0500
Message-ID: <CABirCh9tz83AkGFn9ZjLFgL0wy5KzyC=sLnmBwANCa9EaJSH3g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Glen Shires <gshires@google.com>
Cc: public-xg-htmlspeech@w3.org, public-webapps@w3.org
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Glen Shires <gshires@google.com> wrote:

> We at Google have proposed the formation of a new "Speech API Community
> Group" to pursue a JavaScript Speech API. We encourage you to join and
> support this effort. [1]
>
> We believe that forming a Community Group has the following advantages:
>
> - It’s quick, efficient and minimizes unnecessary process overhead.
>
> - We believe it will allow us, as a group, to reach consensus in
> an efficient manner.
>
> - We hope it will expedite interoperable implementations in
> multiple browsers. (A good example is the Web Media Text Tracks CG, where
> multiple implementations are happening quickly.)
>

If it holds its discussions on this mailing list (or another broad list),
then that's fine--but please don't make everyone subscribe to yet another
mailing list for one narrow topic.  Moving topics to isolated, fragmented
mailing lists also guarantees that a much smaller subset of the community
will participate, which results in a much less informed consensus.

On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Young, Milan <Milan.Young@nuance.com>
 wrote:

> The proposal mentions that the specification of a network speech protocol
> is out of scope. This makes sense given that protocols are the domain of
> the IETF.
>

Protocols aren't the sole domain of the IETF, any more than web APIs are
the sole domain of the W3C.  Narrowing the topics they want to approach is
fine, but there's also nothing wrong with non-IETF bodies defining
protocols.

By the way, please reset your font to the default; you're sending text in
blue (hard to read--if people want to read email in another color, they'll
change their own mailer :).

-- 
Glenn Maynard
Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2012 20:39:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:51 GMT