Re: CG for Speech JavaScript API

CG sounds good, but I agree that the technical aspects of speech are not a good match for the webapps mailing list.

This topic is heavy in linguistics; other work in web apps is not.

I'd like to feel free to explore IPA, code switching, grammar; voicexml, a whole group of topics not particularly relevant to the webapps mailing list.

I will certainly post threads to webapps when appropriate. The API hooks for webkitspeech; the applicability of speech to the IME API-- those I will post to webapps when they are mature.

But most of the issues around speech are not issues that I'd bring up in webapps.

-Charles



On Feb 14, 2012, at 2:45 PM, Olli Pettay <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi> wrote:

> So, if I haven't made it clear before,
> doing the initial standardization work in CG sounds ok to me.
> I do expect that there will be a WG eventually, but perhaps
> CG is a faster and more lightweight way to start - well continue from
> what XG did.
> 
> -Olli
> 
> 
> On 01/31/2012 06:01 PM, Glen Shires wrote:
>> We at Google propose the formation of a new Community Group to pursue a
>> JavaScript Speech API. Specifically, we are proposing this Javascript
>> API [1], which enables web developers to incorporate speech recognition
>> and synthesis into their web pages, and supports the majority of
>> use-cases in the Speech Incubator Group's Final Report [2]. This API
>> enables developers to use scripting to generate text-to-speech output
>> and to use speech recognition as an input for forms, continuous
>> dictation and control. For this first specification, we believe
>> this simplified subset API will accelerate implementation,
>> interoperability testing, standardization and ultimately developer
>> adoption. However, in the spirit of consensus, we are willing to broaden
>> this subset API to include additional Javascript API features in the
>> Speech Incubator Final Report.
>> 
>> 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.)
>> 
>> - We propose the CG will use the public-webapps@w3.org
>> <mailto:public-webapps@w3.org> as its mailing list to provide visibility
>> to a wider audience, with a balanced web-centric view for new JavaScript
>> APIs.  This arrangement has worked well for the HTML Editing API CG [3].
>> Contributions to the specification produced by the Speech API CG will be
>> governed by the Community Group CLA and the CG is responsible for
>> ensuring that all Contributions come from participants that have agreed
>> to the CG CLA.  We believe the response to the CfC [4] has shown
>> substantial interest and support by WebApps members.
>> 
>> - A CG provides an IPR environment that simplifies future transition to
>> standards track.
>> 
>> Google plans to supply an implementation and a test suite for this
>> specification, and will commit to serve as editor.  We hope that others
>> will support this CG as they had stated support for the similar WebApps
>> CfC. [4]
>> 
>> Bjorn Bringert
>> Satish Sampath
>> Glen Shires
>> 
>> [1]
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/att-1696/speechapi.html
>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/htmlspeech/XGR-htmlspeech/
>> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011JulSep/1402.html
>> [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012JanMar/0315.html
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 14 February 2012 22:59:05 UTC