W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > January to March 2002

RE: VoiceXML2.0: Missing "destexpr" attribute in specification of <record> element

From: Scott McGlashan <scott.mcglashan@pipebeach.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 18:31:00 +0100
Message-ID: <2764A29BE430E64A92EB56561587D2E70633EC@se01ms02.i.pipebeach.com>
To: "James Salsman" <j.salsman@bovik.org>
Cc: <www-voice@w3.org>
James,

I am sorry that you are disappointed by W3C and that you do not want to
become a member.  

At this stage I cannot provide you with further internal technical
information while operating within current W3C policies (However, the
VBWG will publish a roadmap for VoiceXML in the coming months to give
non-members a better insight into how the language will evolve. This may
address your concerns). 

If you have specific concerns on W3C operating policies, please contact
W3C staff personnel directly (http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Contact). 


Best Wishes

Scott




-----Original Message-----
From: James Salsman [mailto:j.salsman@bovik.org]
Sent: 05 February 2002 23:50
To: Scott McGlashan
Cc: www-voice@w3.org
Subject: Re: VoiceXML2.0: Missing "destexpr" attribute in specification
of <record> element


Scott,

Thank you for your invitation:

> Due to W3C member confidentially, I cannot go into the details of
> specific technical decisions or even specific features which are being
> considered for future versions (until that information is made public
by
> the group). If you are seriously interested in that level of technical
> discussion I would encourage you to join the Voice Browser Group ---
see
> http://www.w3.org for membership details. This will give you access to
> our internal discussions and decision-making process.
>
> Please let me know if this reply is unsatisfactory, or you want
further
> information.

Yes, I find it unsatisfactory that the W3C still lacks the transparency 
required by most interpretations of the scientific method.  Therefore I 
must respectfully decline your invitation.

I would like further information about the following:

Does general EVAL functionality exist in VoiceXML, and if not, what 
proposals have been made to establish it?

Best wishes,
James Salsman
Received on Wednesday, 6 February 2002 12:29:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 30 October 2006 12:48:54 GMT