W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > April to June 2002

RE: Comments on the VoiceXML 2.0 Working Draft 24 April 2002

From: Scott McGlashan <scott.mcglashan@pipebeach.com>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 15:33:39 +0200
Message-ID: <2764A29BE430E64A92EB56561587D2E7107D5B@se01ms02.i.pipebeach.com>
To: <matthew@mjwilson.demon.co.uk>, <www-voice@w3.org>
Matthew,

thank you for your comments on VoiceXML 2.0 LCWD (including No. 9). We
will get back to you in the next few weeks with our response to your
comments. 

thanks

Scott McGlashan
Dialog team leader, VBWG


-----Original Message-----
From: matthew@mjwilson.demon.co.uk [mailto:matthew@mjwilson.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 10:34
To: www-voice@w3.org
Subject: Comments on the VoiceXML 2.0 Working Draft 24 April 2002


Comments on the VoiceXML 2.0 Working Draft 24 April 2002

1. The index between Appendix N and Appendix P appears to be Appendix
zero, not
   Appendix O.

2. In section 6.5, "Time Designations", the example "+1.5s" still
contradicts
   the text, which describes the format as "an unsigned number followed
by an
   optional time unit identifier".

3. Section 2.1.2.1 "Input Items" says that "implementations must handle
the
   <object> element by throwing error.unsupported.object.objectname if
the
   particular platform-specific object is not supported". Section 2.3.5
   "OBJECT" says that "implementations must handle the <object> element
by
   throwing error.unsupported.object if the particular platform-specific
object
   is not supported" (i.e. it does not include the object name in the
event
   name).  Section 5.2.6 "Event Types" does not list any
   error.unsupported.object events, but does include
error.unsupported.format,
   which is raised if "The requested resource has ... e.g. an
unsupported ...
   object type". Could this be clarified?

4. Events such as error.unsupported.uri, error.unsupported.language,
    error.unsupported.format are ambiguous, since they could also be
    occurrences of error.unsupported.<element> if incorrect elements
have been
    used in the VoiceXML document.

5. Section 6.1.2.1 says that "VoiceXML allows the author to control the
caching
   policy for each use of each resource." Is this true of the
application root
   document?

6. Regarding the "builtin" URI scheme,
   http://www.w3.org/Addressing/schemes#unreg says that "Unregistered
schemes
   should not be deployed widely and should not be used except
experimentally."
   Is there any intention to register the "builtin" scheme?

7. There is a typo "attibute" in the schema in Appendix O (in the
   xsd:annotation for the Accept.attrib attributeGroup).

8. The "minimal Conforming VoiceXML document" in appendix F1 is not
minimal. As
   the text itself states, the XML declaration, and the xmlns:xsi and
   xsi:schemeLocation are not rqeuired for conformance.

Matthew Wilson
Received on Tuesday, 28 May 2002 09:30:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 30 October 2006 12:48:55 GMT