W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-multimodal@w3.org > February 2014

Re: [EmotionML] Additional implementation feedback and Rec publication (was Re: [EmotionML] implementation release and feedbacks)

From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 19:37:42 +0900
Message-ID: <CAJ8iq9VyhUTnO0vvjQmLxkYkn6gm2gvpxuquKVW4nJWx0Pg00A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alexandre Denis <alexandre.denis@loria.fr>
Cc: Patrick Gebhard <patrick.gebhard@dfki.de>, Felix Burkhardt <Felix.Burkhardt@telekom.de>, Marc Schröder <marcschroeder108@gmail.com>, Roddy Cowie <r.cowie@qub.ac.uk>, Deborah Dahl <dahl@conversational-technologies.com>, gerhard.fobe@s2009.tu-chemnitz.de, Edmon Begoli <ebegoli@gmail.com>, "christian@becker-asano.de (christian@becker-asano.de)" <christian@becker-asano.de>, kazemzad@usc.edu, Tim Llewellynn <tim.llewellynn@nviso.ch>, "www-multimodal@w3.org" <www-multimodal@w3.org>
Hi Alexandre,

Sorry for the delay.

We've fixed the issues on the schema file and the EmotionML vocabulary
file, and would like to publish the EmotionML spec as a REC along with
the updated EmotionML Vocabulary Note.

FYI, we added the following changes to the Schema file for the
EmotionML spec:

- Replaced "sequence" with "choice" for the <emotion> element in lines
  91 and 95.

- Changed the "default" to "fixed" for "1.0" in the version attribute
  of <emotion> element in line 96.

- Added [[use="required"]] to the "uri" attribute of the <reference>
  element in line 32.

Please see attached "emotionml-fragments.xsd".

Also we added version information to the EmotionML vocabulary file.
Please see attached "xml.emotionml".

Thanks,

Kazuyuki


On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 3:21 AM, Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi Alexandre,
>
> Happy New Year!  And very sorry for the big delay.
> I have been travelling (business travels :) for a while.
>
> Could you please see inline below?
>
>
> On 12/16/2013 06:43 PM, Alexandre Denis wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>> yes sure, but since I don't see the new specification, I can only trust
>> you that the (small) mistakes are corrected. As for the schemas,
>>
>
> Thanks!
>
>  [5]http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-__emotionml-20130416/emotionml.__xsd
>>>
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-emotionml-20130416/emotionml.xsd>
>>
>>> [6]http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-__emotionml-20130416/emotionml
>>>
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-emotionml-20130416/emotionml->
>> -fragments.xsd
>>
>>
>> The only difference I see with the schemas stored in our implementation
>> is the required status of the version attribute of the <emotionml> tag,
>> and it's possible I altered the schema myself because of the lack of the
>> version in http://www.w3.org/TR/emotion-voc/xml. It is also important to
>> fix the version attribute on this document, otherwise every emotionml
>> document referring to these vocabularies will fail to pass validation (I
>> had to manually disable the corresponding assertion check in the code),
>>
>
> OK.  We'll see the detail of the problem and fix the issue of
> version handling.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Kazuyuki
>
>
>
>> best regards,
>> Alexandre
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org
>> <mailto:ashimura@w3.org>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi Alexandre, Debbie, Felix, Gerhard, Patrick, Marc, Roddy and all,
>>
>>     Thank you very much for your EmotionML implementations!  And I am very
>>     sorry I did not respond to you earlier.  It seems my original message
>>     did not go out due to some trouble.
>>
>>     As you know, there were the following two features which were not
>>     explicitly listed on the EmotionML Implementation Report Plan [a].
>>
>>     ------------------------------__----------------------------
>>
>>     Two features not listed on the Implementation Report Plan:
>>     ------------------------------__----------------------------
>>
>>     Feature1:
>>        In Section 2.4.1 of the spec [b], there is a feature "The end value
>>        MUST be greater than or equal to the start value", which is not
>>        checked in the Implementation Report.
>>
>>     Feature2:
>>        In Section 2.1.2 of the spec [b], there is a feature "a typical use
>>        case is expected to be embedding an <emotion> into some other
>>        markup", which is not checked in the Implementation Report.
>>
>>     However, according to the responses so far, we have already
>>     got the following implementations for the above features.
>>
>>     ------------------------------__------------------
>>
>>     Implementation status of the above two features:
>>     ------------------------------__------------------
>>
>>
>>     Feature1: 3 implementations
>>     - Gerhard Fobe:
>>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/__Public/www-multimodal/
>> 2013Nov/__0000.html
>>
>>     <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-multimodal/2013Nov/0000.html
>> >
>>     - Alexandre Denis:
>>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/__Public/www-multimodal/
>> 2013Nov/__0005.html
>>
>>     <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-multimodal/2013Nov/0005.html
>> >
>>     - Patrick Gebhard:
>>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/__Public/www-multimodal/
>> 2013Nov/__0006.html
>>
>>     <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-multimodal/2013Nov/0006.html
>> >
>>
>>     Feature2: 4 implementations
>>     - Gerhard Fobe:
>>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/__Public/www-multimodal/
>> 2013Nov/__0000.html
>>
>>     <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-multimodal/2013Nov/0000.html
>> >
>>     - Debbie Dahl:
>>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/__Public/www-multimodal/
>> 2013Nov/__0003.html
>>
>>     <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-multimodal/2013Nov/0003.html
>> >
>>     - Alexandre Denis:
>>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/__Public/www-multimodal/
>> 2013Nov/__0005.html
>>
>>     <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-multimodal/2013Nov/0005.html
>> >
>>     - Patrick Gebhard:
>>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/__Public/www-multimodal/
>> 2013Nov/__0006.html
>>
>>     <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-multimodal/2013Nov/0006.html
>> >
>>
>>     As I reported in October [c], we have already fixed typos in the spec
>>     and added necessary clarifications to it.  Also we have fixed the
>>     errors in the EmotionML schema.
>>
>>     So I would like to confirm that it is the time for us all to go ahead
>>     and publish EmotionML as a W3C Recommendation.
>>
>>     Alexandre (as the original commenter), is that OK by you?
>>
>>     [a] http://www.w3.org/2002/mmi/__2012/emotionml-irp/
>>     <http://www.w3.org/2002/mmi/2012/emotionml-irp/>
>>     [b] http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-__emotionml-20130416/
>>     <http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-emotionml-20130416/>
>>     [c]
>>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/__Public/www-multimodal/
>> 2013Oct/__0010.html
>>
>>     <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-multimodal/2013Oct/0010.html
>> >
>>
>>     Thanks,
>>
>>     Kazuyuki
>>
>>
>>     On 11/08/2013 04:52 AM, Patrick Gebhard wrote:
>>
>>         Dear Felix,
>>
>>         I've updated ALMA (a DFKI EmotionML implementation) last October
>>         in esp.
>>         these two features, see attachment. Maybe my email got lost.
>>
>>         Anyway, Feature 1: pass, Feature 2: pass.
>>
>>         Best
>>         Patrick
>>
>>         Am 07.11.2013 um 18:16 schrieb Marc Schröder
>>         <marcschroeder108@gmail.com <mailto:marcschroeder108@gmail.com>
>>         <mailto:marcschroeder108@__gmail.com
>>
>>         <mailto:marcschroeder108@gmail.com>>>:
>>
>>             Hi all,
>>
>>             DFKI's implementation has not-impl for both of these (unless
>>             it has
>>             been changed since I left).
>>
>>             Looking forward to seeing EmotionML become a Rec!
>>
>>             Best,
>>             Marc
>>
>>
>>             On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 3:50 AM, <Felix.Burkhardt@telekom.de
>>             <mailto:Felix.Burkhardt@telekom.de>
>>             <mailto:Felix.Burkhardt@__telekom.de
>>
>>             <mailto:Felix.Burkhardt@telekom.de>>> wrote:
>>
>>                  Dear implementers of EmotionML
>>                  To make a long story short: Alexandre Denis of Loria did
>> a
>>                  thorough review and implementation of EmotionML and
>>             found several
>>                  flaws that we managed to fix, now two issues are still
>>             open and we
>>                  need to know from you whether your implementation
>>             supports two
>>                  features, namely:
>>                  >Feature1:
>>                  >    In Section 2.4.1 of the sepc [1], there is a
>>             feature "The end
>>                  value
>>                  >    MUST be greater than or equal to the start value",
>>             which is not
>>                  >    checked in the Implementation Report.
>>                  >
>>                  >Feature2:
>>                  >    In Section 2.1.2 of the spec [1], there is a
>>             feature "a
>>                  typical use
>>                  >    case is expected to be embedding an <emotion> into
>>             some other
>>                  >    markup", which is not checked in the
>>             Implementation Report.
>>
>>                  Please respond to this mail until 25th of November and
>>             state for
>>                  both features whether it's "pass", "fail"  or "not-impl"
>>                  Please send the answer to the public mailing list:
>>             www-multimodal@w3.org <mailto:www-multimodal@w3.org>
>>             <mailto:www-multimodal@w3.org <mailto:www-multimodal@w3.org>>
>>
>>
>>                  EmotionML will then soon become a real recommendation!
>>
>>                  Thanks a lot,
>>                  Felix
>>
>>                  >-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>                  >Von: Kazuyuki Ashimura [mailto:ashimura@w3.org
>>             <mailto:ashimura@w3.org>
>>                  <mailto:ashimura@w3.org <mailto:ashimura@w3.org>>]
>>                  >Gesendet: Montag, 28. Oktober 2013 07:57
>>                  >An: alexandre.denis@loria.fr
>>             <mailto:alexandre.denis@loria.fr>
>>             <mailto:alexandre.denis@loria.__fr
>>
>>             <mailto:alexandre.denis@loria.fr>>;
>>             www-multimodal@w3.org <mailto:www-multimodal@w3.org>
>>             <mailto:www-multimodal@w3.org <mailto:www-multimodal@w3.org>>
>>
>>                  >Cc: Burkhardt, Felix; Samuel.Cruz-Lara@loria.fr
>>             <mailto:Samuel.Cruz-Lara@loria.fr>
>>                  <mailto:Samuel.Cruz-Lara@__loria.fr
>>
>>             <mailto:Samuel.Cruz-Lara@loria.fr>>
>>                  >Betreff: Re: AW: [EmotionML] implementation release
>>             and feedbacks
>>                  >
>>                  >Dear Alexandre and EmotionML implementers,
>>                  >
>>                  >Thank you very much for implementing EmotionML,
>> Alexandre!
>>                  >Also your thorough review on the EmotionML [1]
>>             specification and the
>>                  >Implementation Report [2] is really appreciated.
>>                  >
>>                  >We are very sorry it took much longer to get consensus
>>             about how
>>                  to respond
>>                  >to you and wrap-up the procedure [3] to publish
>>             EmotionML as a W3C
>>                  >Recommendation.
>>                  >
>>                  >We the W3C Multimodal Interaction Working Group have
>>             already
>>                  fixed typos
>>                  >in the spec and added necessary clarifications to it.
>>  In
>>                  addition, we have
>>                  >generated an updated version of the schema [5, 6].
>>                  >
>>                  >Now the remaining question is how to deal with your
>>             comments on the
>>                  >Implementation Report which wouldn't change the spec
>>             itself.
>>                  >
>>                  >I talked within the W3C Team about what we should have
>>             done from
>>                  the W3C
>>                  >Process viewpoint, and it seems we need to make sure
>>             that there
>>                  are enough
>>                  >implementation experience for the following two
>>             features which
>>                  were not
>>                  >explicitly described in the published Implementation
>>             Report [2].
>>                  >
>>                  >Feature1:
>>                  >    In Section 2.4.1 of the sepc [1], there is a
>>             feature "The end
>>                  value
>>                  >    MUST be greater than or equal to the start value",
>>             which is not
>>                  >    checked in the Implementation Report.
>>                  >
>>                  >Feature2:
>>                  >    In Section 2.1.2 of the spec [1], there is a
>>             feature "a
>>                  typical use
>>                  >    case is expected to be embedding an <emotion> into
>>             some other
>>                  >    markup", which is not checked in the
>>             Implementation Report.
>>                  >
>>                  >We have already checked with EmotionML implementers
>>             (including
>>                  you) and
>>                  >it seems we can get several implementations for the
>>             above two
>>                  features as
>>                  >well.
>>                  >
>>                  >Now we would like to ask all the EmotionML implementers
>> to
>>                  respond to this
>>                  >message and express if the aobve features are
>>             implmented so that
>>                  we can
>>                  >finalize the procedure and publish EmotionML as a W3C
>>             Recommendation.
>>                  >
>>                  >[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-__emotionml-20130416/
>>             <http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-emotionml-20130416/>
>>                  >[2] http://www.w3.org/2002/mmi/__2013/emotionml-ir/
>>             <http://www.w3.org/2002/mmi/2013/emotionml-ir/>
>>                  >[3]
>>             http://www.w3.org/2004/02/__Process-20040205/tr.html#__
>> maturity-levels
>>             <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/Process-20040205/tr.html#
>> maturity-levels>
>>                  >[4]
>>             http://lists.w3.org/Archives/__Public/www-multimodal/
>> 2013May/__0000.html
>>             <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-multimodal/2013May/
>> 0000.html>
>>                  >[5]
>>             http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-__emotionml-20130416/emotionml.
>> __xsd
>>             <http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-emotionml-20130416/emotionml.
>> xsd>
>>                  >[6]
>>             http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-__emotionml-20130416/emotionml-
>>
>>             <http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-emotionml-20130416/emotionml->
>>                  >fragments.xsd
>>                  >
>>                  >Sincerely,
>>                  >
>>                  >Kazuyuki Ashimura;
>>                  >for the W3C Multimodal Interaction Working Group
>>                  >
>>                  >
>>                  >
>>                  >On 05/02/2013 07:00 PM, Felix.Burkhardt@telekom.de
>>             <mailto:Felix.Burkhardt@telekom.de>
>>                  <mailto:Felix.Burkhardt@__telekom.de
>>
>>             <mailto:Felix.Burkhardt@telekom.de>> wrote:
>>                  >> Congratulations, Alexandre
>>                  >>
>>                  >>  >Sorry to give you more work!
>>                  >>
>>                  >> Not at all, I'm indeed very happy you work with
>>             EmotionML and
>>                  grateful
>>                  >> you do such a thorough job in revising it!
>>                  >>
>>                  >> It's just it'll take me/us some time to react on
>>             this, sorry
>>                  about this.
>>                  >>
>>                  >> Kind regards,
>>                  >>
>>                  >> Felix
>>                  >>
>>                  >> *Von:*Alexandre Denis
>>             [mailto:alexandre.denis@loria.__fr
>>             <mailto:alexandre.denis@loria.fr>
>>                  <mailto:alexandre.denis@loria.__fr
>>
>>             <mailto:alexandre.denis@loria.fr>>]
>>                  >> *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 2. Mai 2013 11:43
>>                  >> *An:* www-multimodal@w3.org
>>             <mailto:www-multimodal@w3.org> <mailto:www-multimodal@w3.org
>>             <mailto:www-multimodal@w3.org>>__;
>>
>>                  Samuel CRUZ-LARA
>>                  >> *Betreff:* [EmotionML] implementation release and
>>             feedbacks
>>                  >>
>>                  >> Hello all,
>>                  >>
>>                  >> I'm happy to announce that we released the very
>>             first version
>>                  of our
>>                  >> EmotionML Java implementation. It is hosted on
>>             google code and
>>                  >> released under the MIT license:
>>                  >> https://code.google.com/p/__loria-synalp-emotionml/
>>
>>             <https://code.google.com/p/loria-synalp-emotionml/>
>>                  >>
>>                  >> It is still considered as an alpha version, we would
>>             need some
>>                  users
>>                  >> to validate its use. And there is still some work on
>> the
>>                  documentation
>>                  >> but the core of the code is there.
>>                  >>
>>                  >> If we could be listed as an implementation in the
>>             next round of the
>>                  >> implementation report it would be nice. Here is the
>>             description:
>>                  >>
>>                  >> Alexandre Denis, LORIA laboratory, SYNALP team, France
>>                  >>
>>                  >> The LORIA/SYNALP implementation of EmotionML is a
>>             Java standalone
>>                  >> library developed in the context of the ITEA
>>             Empathic Products
>>                  project
>>                  >> by the LORIA/SYNALP team. It enables to import Java
>>             objects from
>>                  >> EmotionML XML files and export them to EmotionML as
>>             well. It
>>                  >> guarantees standard compliance by performing a two
>>             steps validation
>>                  >> after all export operations and before all import
>>             operations: first
>>                  >> the EmotionML schema is tested, then all EmotionML
>>             assertions are
>>                  >> tested. If one or the other fails, an error message
>>             is produced and
>>                  >> the document cannot be imported or exported. The
>>             library contains a
>>                  >> corpus of badly formatted EmotionML files that
>>             enables to
>>                  double check
>>                  >> if both the schema and the assertions manage to
>>             correctly
>>                  invalidate
>>                  >> them. The API is hosted on google code
>>                  >> (https://code.google.com/p/__loria-synalp-emotionml/
>>             <https://code.google.com/p/loria-synalp-emotionml/>) and is
>>
>>                  released under
>>                  >the MIT License.
>>                  >>
>>                  >> Moreover I don't come to you with empty hands, and I
>>             have a
>>                  bunch of
>>                  >> remarks related to the EmotionML specification.
>>             Sorry to give
>>                  you more
>>                  >work!
>>                  >>
>>                  >> best regards,
>>                  >>
>>                  >> Alexandre Denis
>>                  >>
>>                  >> *** Comments about EmotionML specification
>>                  >>
>>                  >> In what follows:
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - "specification" refers to the document at
>>                  >> http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-__emotionml-20130416/
>>
>>             <http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/PR-emotionml-20130416/> (version
>>             of 16
>>                  April
>>                  >> 2013)
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - "assertions" refers to the list of assertions at
>>                  >>
>>             http://www.w3.org/2002/mmi/__2013/emotionml-ir/#test_class
>>
>>             <http://www.w3.org/2002/mmi/2013/emotionml-ir/#test_class>
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - "schema" refers to the schemas
>>                  >> http://www.w3.org/TR/__emotionml/emotionml.xsd
>>             <http://www.w3.org/TR/emotionml/emotionml.xsd> and
>>                  >>
>>             http://www.w3.org/TR/__emotionml/emotionml-fragments.__xsd
>>
>>             <http://www.w3.org/TR/emotionml/emotionml-fragments.xsd>
>>                  >>
>>                  >> ** Specification clarification questions
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - About relative and absolute timing ?
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - Is that possible to mix relative and
>>             absolute
>>                  timing ?
>>                  >> Intuitively this would seem weird but nothing in the
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              specification prevents it.
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - About consistency of start/end/duration ?
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - I think the specification does not
>>             enforce the
>>                  >> consistency of start, end and duration which are
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              possible alltogether. Hence it is
>>             possible to have
>>                  >> inconsistent triplets (start=0, end=5, duration=10).
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - About text nodes ?
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - the emotion element can have text nodes
>>                  children, it is
>>                  >> not specified how many. Is it possible to
>>             intersperse text
>>                  nodes all
>>                  >> over
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              an emotion element ? The fact that an
>>             emotion
>>                  element can
>>                  >> have text children is not specified in its children
>>             list.
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - About emotion children combinations ?
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - the specification states "There are no
>>                  constraints on
>>                  >> the combinations of children that are allowed.", it
>>             is maybe
>>                  confusing
>>                  >> since
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              an emotion cannot contain two
>>             categories that
>>                  belong to
>>                  >> different category-sets or two categories with the
>>             same name.
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - About default values ?
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - some attributes have default values
>>             (reference role,
>>                  >> time ref anchor point, duration, etc.), is it
>>             desirable to have a
>>                  >> default
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              value also for other attributes,
>>             especially for
>>                  the "value"
>>                  >> attribute ? For instance, how would you compare
>>             <category
>>                  >> name="surprise"/>
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              and <category name="surprise"
>>             value="1.0"/> ? Are they
>>                  >> semantically equivalent ? A similar question could
>>             be made
>>                  about the
>>                  >> "confidence"
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              attribute, how would you compare
>> <category
>>                  >> name="surprise"/> and <category name="surprise"
>>                  confidence="1.0"/> ?
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - About the number of <trace> ?
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - the specification does not state
>>             clearly if it is
>>                  >> possible to have several <trace> elements inside a
>>             descriptor,
>>                  it is
>>                  >> stated
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              "a <trace> element". Maybe it should be
>>             stated "If
>>                  >> present the following child element can occur one or
>>             more time:
>>                  <trace>".
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              The schema allows that. If this comment
>> is
>>                  accepted, the
>>                  >> assertions 215, 224, 235, 245 should also be
>> clarified.
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - About conformance ?
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - In section 4.3, it is stated "It is the
>>                  responsibility
>>                  >> of an EmotionML processor to verify that the use of
>>             descriptor
>>                  names
>>                  >> and values
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              is consistent with the vocabulary
>>             definition",
>>                  which is
>>                  >> true but incomplete with regards to the assertions,
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              maybe it would be beneficial to specify
>>             all the
>>                  >> assertions that are not under the schema
>>             responsability but
>>                  rather the
>>                  >> EmotionML processor
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              (see below) or at least warn that there
>>             are many
>>                  >> assertions not checked by the schema.
>>                  >>
>>                  >> ** Discrepancies between
>>             schema/assertions/__specification
>>
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - Assertions not tested by the schema
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - I found that the following assertions
>>             are not
>>                  tested by
>>                  >> the schema : 114, 117, 120, 123, 161, 164, 167, 170,
>>             172, 210, 212,
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              216, 220, 222, 224, 230, 232, 236, 240,
>>             242, 246,
>>                  410, 417.
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              There are assertions that are
>>             impossible to test
>>                  with a
>>                  >> XSD schema I think:
>>                  >>
>>                  >>                          114, 117, 120, 123, 161,
>>             164, 167, 170 :
>>                  >> vocabulary set id and type checking
>>                  >>
>>                  >>                          212, 222, 232, 242 :
>>             vocabulary name
>>                  >> membership
>>                  >>
>>                  >>                          417 : media type (unless
>>             enumerating them)
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              Some may be possible with some tweaking:
>>                  >>
>>                  >>                          210, 220, 230, 240 :
>>             vocabulary set
>>                  presence
>>                  >>
>>                  >>                          216, 224, 236, 246 :
>>             <trace> and "value"
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              There are two "true" errors I think:
>>                  >>
>>                  >>                          172 : The "version"
>>             attribute of
>>                  <emotion>,
>>                  >> if present, MUST have the  value "1.0"
>>                  >>
>>                  >>                                      I think it
>>             should not be
>>                  >> "optional with default value 1.0" but rather
>>             "optional with
>>                  fixed value 1.0"
>>                  >>
>>                  >>                          410 : The <reference>
>>             element MUST
>>                  contain a
>>                  >> "uri" attribute
>>                  >>
>>                  >>                                      the "uri"
>>             attribute is
>>                  optional
>>                  >> by default in the schema
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - 2.4.1, "The end value MUST be greater than or
>>             equal to the start
>>                  >> value",
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - the schema does not check it and
>>             there is no
>>                  assertion
>>                  >> enforcing it
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - 2.1.2, "a typical use case is expected to be
>>             embedding an
>>                  <emotion>
>>                  >> into some other markup",
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - there is no assertion that describe
>> that
>>                  <emotion> may
>>                  >> be embedded in another markup, does it imply we
>>             could embed other
>>                  >elements ?
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - is a document containing a sole
>>             <emotion> a valid
>>                  >> document (not in the sense of <emotionml> document)
>>             ? If yes,
>>                  maybe an
>>                  >> assertion clarifiying the use of <emotion> would be
>>             useful.
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - assertions 105, 155, 601, 606, status "Req=N"
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - the assertions mix the presence of
>>             <info> and the
>>                  >> number of <info> elements, while the presence is not
>>                  restricted, the
>>                  >> number
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              MUST be 0 or 1, hence the required
>>             status wrt this
>>                  part
>>                  >> of assertions should be "Req=Y"
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - 2.1.2, "There are no constraints on the order in
>> which
>>                  children occur"
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - the schema does actually restrict the
>>             order of
>>                  >> elements, <info> needs to be first, then the
>>             descriptors, then the
>>                  >> references
>>                  >>
>>                  >> ** Invalid documents
>>                  >>
>>                  >> (I have not systematically tested examples with
>>             non-valid
>>                  vocabulary
>>                  >> URIs such as http://www.example.
>>             <http://www.example./>...)
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - http://www.w3.org/TR/emotion-__voc/xml
>>
>>             <http://www.w3.org/TR/emotion-voc/xml> does not comply with
>>                  assertion
>>                  >> 110 (hence all examples that refer to vocabularies
>>             there also fail)
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - 2.3.3 The <info> element
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - The last example of this section does
>>             not comply
>>                  with
>>                  >> assertion 212 since the name "neutral" does not
>>             belong to every-day
>>                  >> categories
>>                  >>
>>                  >> - 5.1.1 Annotation of Text, "Annotation of text"
>>             Lewis Caroll
>>                  example:
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - In the <meta:doc> element, the
>>             character & is found,
>>                  >> which does not pass XML validation, it should be
>>             &amp; (so does the
>>                  >> example below)
>>                  >>
>>                  >>              - It also does not comply with
>>             assertion 212 since
>>                  >> Disgust and Anger are not part of every-day categories
>>                  >>
>>                  >
>>                  >
>>                  >--
>>                  >Kaz Ashimura, W3C Staff Contact for Web&TV, MMI and
>> Voice
>>                  >Tel: +81 466 49 1170 <tel:%2B81%20466%2049%201170>
>>             <tel:%2B81%20466%2049%201170>
>>
>>
>>         =
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     --
>>     Kaz Ashimura, W3C Staff Contact for Web&TV, MMI and Voice
>>     Tel: +81 466 49 1170 <tel:%2B81%20466%2049%201170>
>>
>>
>>
> --
> Kaz Ashimura, W3C Activity Lead for Web&TV, MMI and Voice
>
> Tel: +81 466 49 1170
>



-- 
Kaz Ashimura, W3C Staff Contact for Web&TV, MMI and Voice
Tel: +81 466 49 1170


Received on Tuesday, 18 February 2014 10:38:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:06:38 UTC