W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > July to September 2002

More VXML comments and clarification suggestions

From: Guillaume Berche <guillaume.berche@eloquant.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 11:16:50 +0200
To: <www-voice@w3.org>
Message-ID: <ELEGLIHGLLIBFPCIGAKGGEPDCNAA.guillaume.berche@eloquant.com>

Hello,

Following are additional suggestions for clarifications of the VXML 2.0 W3C
Working Draft from 24 April 2002. Again, I understand the deadline for
comments on VoiceXML 2.0 Last Call Working Draft was the 24th May 2002 and
that my comments may not be taken into account for the 2.0 release. The
comments below are mainly wording suggestions or typos. I hope they can be
useful.

- Incorrect time designation pattern in schema:
The time designation pattern "Duration.datatype" is defined as
"\+?[0-9]+(m?s)?" in the schema. However, this does not include real numbers
such as "1.5s" as specified by CSS2 section "4.3.1 Integers and real
numbers"

Suggested modification to the definition of "Duration.datatype" in the
schema:
 <xsd:restriction base="xsd:string">
  <xsd:pattern value="\+?[0-9]+(\.[0-9]+)?(m?s)?" />
  </xsd:restriction>


- Precise the Exit expr attribute is an **ECMAScript** expression which may
resolve into a defined variable
Suggested text modification to section "5.3.9 EXIT":
"expr: An **ECMAScript** expression that is evaluated as the return value
(e.g. "0", "'oops!'", or "field1")."


- Precise which event is thrown if the nextitem or expreitem attribute of a
Goto element refers to a non-existing **form item**.

Suggested text modification to section "5.3.7 GOTO":
"If the **form item**, dialog, or document to transition to is not valid
(i.e. the **form item**, dialog or document does not exist), an
error.badfetch must be thrown. "






I also have a question concerning the "Mapping Semantic Interpretation
Results to VoiceXML forms" that I could not answer. When an input item
contains a grammar with a dialog scope, would this grammar be considered as
a form-level grammar (and therefore be semantically equivalent to a grammar
element defined in the form) or would the interpretation of its results be
different that a form-level grammar?
In particular, if this grammar matches, would the other input items be
inspected for match of their slot names on this match?
If such a grammar is handled as a form-level grammar, I don't quite
understand the benefit for developers to have it as a child of an input item
rather than as a child of the form. Can somebody please point me to the
appropriate section in the specifications which detail this or provide me
with details?

Any comment on this is much welcomed.

Thanks,

------------------------------------------
Guillaume Berche
Eloquant, ZA Le malvaisin
38240 Le Versoud, France
guillaume.berche@eloquant.com
+33 04 76 77 46 92
------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 13 August 2002 05:17:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 30 October 2006 12:48:56 GMT