W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > October to December 2006

Foreach description discrepancies

From: Petr Kuba <kuba@optimsys.cz>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:59:54 +0100
Message-ID: <45812EAA.4060509@optimsys.cz>
To: www-voice@w3.org

Dear WBWG,

We very appreciate the changes to the specification of foreach done in
the LCWD from 15 September 2006. However, we found few discrepancies
in what is written in the specification and what is written is the
corresponding XML Schema.


1. Content of <foreach> in executable content except within a <prompt>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Original text (first parahraph of Section 6):
"Within executable content, except within a <prompt>, the <foreach>
element may contain any elements of executable content"

Comment:
We beleive that it was ment that it may contain any elements of executable
content and nothing more. However, the foreach-full.type definition in the
XML Schema that applies to the <foreach> in executable content except
within a <prompt> allows also the following children:
break, emphasis, mark, phoneme, prosody, say-as, sub, voice, p, s
which is probably not what was ment. It would introduce an inconsistency
because the named elements must be in other situations enclosed in
a <prompt> element.

Proposed change:
Remove the elements that cannot appear in executable content from the
XML Schema.

2. Differences in <prompt> and <enumerate> content
--------------------------------------------------
The text in the first parahraph of Section 6 explicitly enumerates
differencies in <prompt> and <enumerate> content but forgot to
mention the <foreach> tag.

Original text:
"When <foreach> appears within a <prompt> element, it may contain only
those elements valid within <enumerate> (i.e. the same elements allowed
within <prompt> less <meta>, <metadata>, and <lexicon>); ..."

Proposed change:
"When <foreach> appears within a <prompt> element, it may contain only
those elements valid within <enumerate> (i.e. the same elements allowed
within <prompt> less <meta>, <metadata>, <lexicon>, and <foreach>); ..."

3. Nesting of <foreach> in <prompt>
-----------------------------------
The XML Schema allows the <foreach> tag to be only a direct child of the
<prompt> tag. Thus, nesting is not possible. Is there any rationale behind
not allowing nesting of <foreach> in prompts? Allowing the <foreach> tag
to be a child of another <foreach> tag in prompts would cause no harm and
could be sometimes helpful. Moreover, nesting of <foreach> within
executable content except within a prompt is possible.

Proposed change:
We do not propose any change in this respect, we would just like to get
some rationale for the current situation. Perhaps it could be explicitly
stated in the spec that nesting of <foreach> in prompts is not possible?


Any comments to our proposals are appreciated.

Regards,
Petr Kuba

-- 
    Petr Kuba, Project Manager
    OptimSys, s.r.o
    kuba@optimsys.cz
    Tel: +420 541 143 065
    Fax: +420 541 143 066
    http://www.optimsys.cz
Received on Thursday, 14 December 2006 11:00:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 14 December 2006 11:00:17 GMT