W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: Clarification on blind transfer ( is needed )

From: Ken Rehor <ken@rehor.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 06:05:13 -0600
Message-ID: <0ac401c2c145$5b837040$312e480c@krehor>
To: "Teemu Tingander" <Teemu.Tingander@tecnomen.fi>, <www-voice@w3.org>

Your summary is correct. The result should be 'near_end_disconnect' if a
caller cancels a transfer by barging in on a prompt, for both blind and
bridge transfers. This is because prompts are queued and played to
completion before the call transfer begins in either case.

The shadow variables would be filled as you describe.

This will be clarified in a future revision of the specification.

Ken Rehor

----- Original Message -----
From: "Teemu Tingander" <Teemu.Tingander@tecnomen.fi>
To: <www-voice@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 1:23 AM
Subject: RE: Clarification on blind transfer ( is needed )

> Hi .
> As I'm not a part of committee this is just a lucky guess; And this is the
> way how I handle it.
> As you said that transfer is always modal the grammars that are inside
> <transfer> element are field item grammars and as such they should filled
> the field item specified by name tag. But cause this is a transfer and the
> specification says that match in grammar of transfer should terminate the
> transfer, my opinnion is that the field should be filled with
> 'near_end_diconnect' and put the shadow variables as they should be
> You have the point in here taht specification really does make difference
> with the cases
> The possible outcomes for a bridge transfer before the connection to
> the callee is established are:
> and
> The possible outcomes for a bridge transfer after the connection to
> the callee is established are:
> And it is not clearly said what should be done if bargein happens. This
> should be defined in the first one of those cases.
> This same issue raises with blind as well as bridgerd transfer, and i used
> 'near_end_diconnect' to indicate that the caller has requested to cancel
> disconnect the call.
> And what comes in tagging of those grammars, if someone really finds some
> reason for that, could explain it more deeply.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arnaud VALLEE [mailto:avallee@telisma.com]
> Sent: 16. tammikuuta 2003 19:30
> To: www-voice@w3.org
> Subject: Clarification on blind transfer
> Hello,
> I need some clarification on this point:
> Blind Transfer
> With a blind transfer, an attempt is made to connect the original caller
> with the callee. Any prompts preceeding the <transfer>, as well as prompts
> within the <transfer>, are queued and played before the transfer attempt
> begins; bargein properties apply as normal.
> As the transfer is modal, a bargein can happen only if we define a grammar
> under transfer.
> But what is the consequence of matching the grammar with a recognition
> result while the prompt are played?
> What will be the value of the transfer item variable?
> Thanks for your clarification.
> Arnaud.
Received on Tuesday, 21 January 2003 07:02:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:07:36 UTC