W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: to add Speech API to Charter; deadline January 19

From: Satish S <satish@google.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:26:38 +0000
Message-ID: <CAHZf7RkAVxQVA-Pg-ny8byAVDiMbKkjj_W74CiO+NtEYxBRaTg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Young, Milan" <Milan.Young@nuance.com>
Cc: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, public-xg-htmlspeech@w3.org
(Sorry if reply got posted twice, my mail app messed up formatting the
first time)

Milan,

It looks like we agree on several things:

*  That we'd like to see the JavaScript Speech API included in the
   WebApps' charter.
*  That we believe the wire protocol is best suited for another
   organization, such as IETF.
*  That we believe the markup bindings may be excluded.

Our only difference seems to be whether to start with the extensive
Javascript API proposed in [1] or the simplified subset of it proposed in
[2], which supports the majority of use cases in the XG’s Final Report.

Art Barstow asked for “a relatively specific proposal” and provided some
precedence examples regarding the level of detail. [3]

Olli Pettay wrote in [4] “Since from practical point of view the
API+protocol XG defined is a huge thing to implement at once, it makes
sense to implement it in pieces.”

Starting with a baseline that supports the majority of use cases will
accelerate implementation, interoperability testing, standardization and
ultimately developer adoption.

Cheers
Satish

[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/htmlspeech/XGR-htmlspeech/
[2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/att-1696/speechapi.html
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/1474.html
[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012JanMar/0068.html


On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Young, Milan <Milan.Young@nuance.com>wrote:

> I've made the point a few times now, and would appreciate a response.
> Why are we preferring to seed WebApps speech with [2] when we already
> have [3] that represents industry consensus as of a month ago (Google
> not withstanding)?  Proceeding with [2] would almost surely delay the
> resulting specification as functionality would patched and haggled over
> to meet consensus.
>
> My counter proposal is to open the HTML/speech marriage in WebApps
> essentially where we left off at [3].  The only variants being: 1)
> Dropping the markup bindings in sections 7.1.2/7.1.3 because its primary
> supporter has since expressed non-interest, and 2) Spin the protocol
> specification in 7.2 out to the IETF.  If I need to formalize all of
> this in a document, please let me know.
>
> Thank you
>
> [3] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/htmlspeech/XGR-htmlspeech/
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.barstow@nokia.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 4:31 AM
> To: public-webapps
> Cc: public-xg-htmlspeech@w3.org
> Subject: CfC: to add Speech API to Charter; deadline January 19
>
> Glen Shires and some others at Google proposed [1] that WebApps add
> Speech API to WebApps' charter and they put forward the Speech
> Javascript API Specification [2] as as a starting point. Members of
> Mozilla and Nuance have voiced various levels of support for this
> proposal. As such, this is a Call for Consensus to add Speech API to
> WebApps' charter.
>
> Positive response to this CfC is preferred and encouraged and silence
> will be considered as agreeing with the proposal. The deadline for
> comments is January 19 and all comments should be sent to public-webapps
> at w3.org.
>
> -AB
>
> [1]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/1696.html
> [2]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/att-1696/s
> peechapi.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/att-1696/speechapi.html>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 12 January 2012 22:27:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:50 GMT