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: Alexandre Denis <alexandre.denis@loria.fr>
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 09:14:51 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPYqdFfOuJdpWPn=y+Ey=FxkrDg43RTwKXERpnXQJ0r376zJJA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
Cc: Felix Burkhardt <Felix.Burkhardt@telekom.de>, Deborah Dahl <dahl@conversational-technologies.com>, "www-multimodal@w3.org" <www-multimodal@w3.org>
Hello all,
yes sure, there are already several assertions that cannot be tested with
the schema. Our implementation double checks the schema and the assertions,
so for us it's not a real problem.
If you are interested in comparing assertions vs schema, here are some
files that we designed to test the validation process:
https://code.google.com/p/loria-synalp-emotionml/source/browse/#svn%2Ftrunk%2Ftests%2Ffail
(note: the new schema is not added yet in our repository)
best regards,
Alexandre


On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi Alexandre and Felix,
>
> I think what Debbie says here is correct.
>
> The features of a W3C specification are described in the specification
> draft itself, and Schema file is provided just to check basic syntax
> errors for convenience.
>
> Also the purpose of the Implementation Report Plan [a] is to provide
> clear description of all the features of a specification so that
> developers can check if their implementations work properly (and the
> specification is implementable).
>
> So if some of the EmotionML features can't be checked using Schema, we
> can simply use some test EmotionML file and see whether a specific
> EmotionML implementation can work with the file or not.
>
> For example, to test if assertion 156 is implementable, we can
> use a brief test156.emotionml like:
> [[
> <emotionml xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2009/10/emotionml"
>         category-set="http://www.w3.org/TR/emotion-voc/xml#big6"
>         version="1.0">
>
>     <emotion>
>         <info><origin:localization value="bavarian"/></info>
>         <!-- <category name="happiness"/> --> <!-- omit category -->
>     </emotion>
>
> </emotionml>
> ]]
> and see if the implementation generates an error.
>
> # I think Alexandre's fail_156.xml is also fine :)
>
> [a] http://www.w3.org/2002/mmi/2012/emotionml-irp/
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kazuyuki
>
>
> On 02/20/2014 01:11 AM, Deborah Dahl wrote:> Hi Felix,
>
> >
> > Thanks for your succinct summary of the constraints on an XML Schema
> > based approach to describing this feature.
> >
> > If there is a Schema-based approach, then of course it would be good to
> > describe the feature in the Schema, but features of a W3C specification
> > are required to be describable  in a Schema. The text of the
> > specification defines the language, not the Schema. So we should not
> > spend a huge amount of time trying to make the Schema describe this
> feature.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Debbie
> >
> > *From:*Felix.Burkhardt@telekom.de [mailto:Felix.Burkhardt@telekom.de]
> > *Sent:* Wednesday, February 19, 2014 10:06 AM
> > *To:* alexandre.denis@loria.fr
> > *Cc:* ashimura@w3.org; dahl@conversational-technologies.com;
> > www-multimodal@w3.org
> > *Subject:* AW: [EmotionML] Additional implementation feedback and Rec
>
> > publication (was Re: [EmotionML] implementation release and feedbacks)
> >
> > Very sorry, Alexandre, you're right, I mixed up the files and used the
> > old version.
> >
> > I did some testing and it seems you're right again, the problem seems
> > that , in a choice, if one element has minOccurs=0 this goes for all
> > elements, even if minOccurs=1 is stated, a behavior I find very
> unexpected.
> >
> > We have to find a solution if this can be stated at all in XML schema.
> >
> > To state the problem once more (as I understood it):
> >
> > We need to find a possibility to enforce
> >
> > -That an element has children
> >
> > -Some are optional, at most once
> >
> > -A Group of elements is required (one of them at least once)
> >
> > -The order is not restricted.
>
> >
> > If we cannot state this, assertion 156 cannot be tested by automatic
> > Schema validation.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Felix
> >
> > *Von:*Alexandre Denis [mailto:alexandre.denis@loria.fr]
> > *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 19. Februar 2014 15:21
> > *An:* Burkhardt, Felix
> > *Cc:* Kazuyuki Ashimura; Deborah Dahl; www-multimodal@w3.org
> > <mailto:www-multimodal@w3.org>
> > *Betreff:* Re: [EmotionML] Additional implementation feedback and Rec
>
> > publication (was Re: [EmotionML] implementation release and feedbacks)
> >
> > Hi Felix,
> >
> > thanks for the feedback, please note that I used the Kazuyuki version
> > (I'm not sure what do you refer to with "current file"). I'm actually
> > using the validation API of Java (jdk1.7.0_51). There might be indeed
> > something wrong with it or with my use of it.
> >
> > I cannot test with Notepad++ (I'm on Mac). However, when testing with an
> > online validator, the fail_156.xml file passes validation with the new
> xsd:
> >
> > http://www.utilities-online.info/xsdvalidation/?save=
> 99b401a2-c0ba-4004-a3c8-c3fefd74d993-xsdvalidation#.UwS5cUJ5N_U
> >
> > The XSD on the right merges:
> >
> > - the root schema : http://www.w3.org/TR/emotionml/emotionml.xsd
> >
> > - the emotionml-fragments.xsd sent by Kazuyuki
> >
> > Nevertheless, when testing the same fail_156.xml with the schemas
> > available on the EmotionML page:
> >
> > http://www.utilities-online.info/xsdvalidation/?save=
> f7d401df-c512-48bb-9062-f97d676b13e0-xsdvalidation#.UwS7Z0J5N_U
> >
> > It does not pass the validation as expected with the same result that
> > you have (so that's why I'm not sure of which schema you used).
> > The XSD on the right merges:
> >
> > - the root schema : http://www.w3.org/TR/emotionml/emotionml.xsd
> >
> > - the fragments : http://www.w3.org/TR/emotionml/emotionml-fragments.xsd
> >
> > Are you able to reproduce these results? Maybe I just did something
> wrong,
> >
> > best regards,
> >
> > Alex
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 2:49 PM, <Felix.Burkhardt@telekom.de
> > <mailto:Felix.Burkhardt@telekom.de>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all
> >
> > If I try to validate Alexandre's file with the free Notepad++ editor
> >
> > I get
> >
> > Validation of current file using XML schema:
> >
> > ERROR: Element '{http://www.w3.org/2009/10/emotionml}emotion
> > <http://www.w3.org/2009/10/emotionml%7Demotion>': Missing child
>
> > element(s). Expected is one of (
> > {http://www.w3.org/2009/10/emotionml}info
> > <http://www.w3.org/2009/10/emotionml%7Dinfo>,
> > {http://www.w3.org/2009/10/emotionml}category
> > <http://www.w3.org/2009/10/emotionml%7Dcategory>,
> > {http://www.w3.org/2009/10/emotionml}dimension
> > <http://www.w3.org/2009/10/emotionml%7Ddimension>,
> > {http://www.w3.org/2009/10/emotionml}appraisal
> > <http://www.w3.org/2009/10/emotionml%7Dappraisal>,
> > {http://www.w3.org/2009/10/emotionml}action-tendency
> > <http://www.w3.org/2009/10/emotionml%7Daction-tendency> ).
>
> >
> > Which is just what should happen.
> >
> > So it seems the xsd works with this respect,
> >
> > perhaps Alexandre's implementation has really a problem here?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Felix
> >
> > *Von:*Alexandre Denis [mailto:alexandre.denis@loria.fr
> > <mailto:alexandre.denis@loria.fr>]
> > *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 19. Februar 2014 11:53
> > *An:* Kazuyuki Ashimura
> > *Cc:* Patrick Gebhard; Burkhardt, Felix; Marc Schröder; Roddy Cowie;
> > Deborah Dahl; gerhard.fobe@s2009.tu-chemnitz.de
> > <mailto:gerhard.fobe@s2009.tu-chemnitz.de>; Edmon Begoli;
> > christian@becker-asano.de <mailto:christian@becker-asano.de>
> > (christian@becker-asano.de <mailto:christian@becker-asano.de>);
> > kazemzad@usc.edu <mailto:kazemzad@usc.edu>; Tim Llewellynn;
> > www-multimodal@w3.org <mailto:www-multimodal@w3.org>
> > *Betreff:* Re: [EmotionML] Additional implementation feedback and Rec
>
> > publication (was Re: [EmotionML] implementation release and feedbacks)
> >
> > Hello Kazuyuki,
> >
> > thanks for the update. Please note that assertion 156 is not tested
> > anymore (The <emotion> element MUST contain at least one <category> or
> > <dimension> or <appraisal> or <action-tendency> element). I think this
> > is because of the <choice> which now seems to accept empty emotions.
> > This could be caused by the interaction between <choice> and children
> > minOccurs=0, it could also be a problem with the implementation I'm
> > using. Could you please test the new schema on the given file with your
> > own validator ? Otherwise it's fine, previous assertions that were not
> > tested are now tested (172, 410 and 417),
> >
> > best regards,
> >
> > Alexandre
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org
> > <mailto:ashimura@w3.org>> wrote:
> >
> > 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
> > <mailto: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>
> >
> > <mailto: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>>
> >
> >          <mailto:marcschroeder108@ <mailto:marcschroeder108@>__gmail.com
> > <http://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>>
> >
> >              <mailto:Felix.Burkhardt@
> > <mailto:Felix.Burkhardt@>__telekom.de <http://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>>
> >
> >              <mailto: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>>
> >                   <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>>
> >
> >              <mailto:alexandre.denis@loria.
> > <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>>
> >
> >              <mailto: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>>
> >
> >                   <mailto:Samuel.Cruz-Lara@
> > <mailto:Samuel.Cruz-Lara@>__loria.fr <http://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>>
> >
> >                   <mailto:Felix.Burkhardt@
> > <mailto:Felix.Burkhardt@>__telekom.de <http://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.
> > <mailto:alexandre.denis@loria.>__fr
> >              <mailto:alexandre.denis@loria.fr
> > <mailto:alexandre.denis@loria.fr>>
> >                   <mailto:alexandre.denis@loria.
> > <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>> <mailto: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>
> >              <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>
> > <tel:%2B81%20466%2049%201170>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Kaz Ashimura, W3C Activity Lead for Web&TV, MMI and Voice
> >
> >
> > Tel: +81 466 49 1170 <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
>
>
Received on Monday, 24 February 2014 08:15:31 UTC

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