W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > January to March 2008

Re: CCXML : Query regarding error.semantic - ISSUE-235

From: RJ Auburn <rj@voxeo.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:05:56 -0500
Cc: www-voice@w3.org, W3C Voice Browser Working Group <w3c-voice-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <623C3390-68A4-4431-8175-B48E4818C0A5@voxeo.com>
To: murulidharar@huawei.com

Murali,

As we have not heard back we are going to assume that our reply below  
is acceptable for you. As such we have closed out this issue in our  
tacker system.

The working group thanks you for your comments and greatly appreciates  
your help in improving the CCXML specification.

Best regards,

	RJ


---
RJ Auburn
CTO, Voxeo Corporation
tel:+1-407-418-1800



On Dec 13, 2007, at 10:10:55, RJ Auburn wrote:

> Murali,
>
> This was tracked as ISSUE-235.
>
> This has actually been clarified in the updated version of the spec.  
> The new text now states in section 9.1:
>
> Once selected, an object representing the event being processed is  
> created at transition scope, and the elements inside the<transition>  
> are executed in document order. If ECMAScript evaluation errors  
> occurs during the execution of an element within a transition, then  
> successive elements within that transition MUST NOT be executed; an  
> error.semantic MUST be raised for the element whose attributes could  
> not be evaluated. Note that errors caused by failures in the  
> execution of an element (such as a<disconnect> on an invalid  
> connection ID), including any that generate an ERROR.SEMANTIC event,  
> MUST NOT terminate execution of the transition.
>
>
> We believe this should address your concern and make it clear that  
> error.semantic MUST be thrown in these cases.
>
> Please let us know if this addresses your concern. If you think  
> further clarification is needed please let us know within 3 weeks  
> otherwise we will consider this issue fully resolved.
>
> Best regards,
>
> 	RJ
>
> ---
> RJ Auburn
> CTO, Voxeo Corporation
> tel:+1-407-418-1800
>
>
>
> On Apr 3, 2007, at 08:05 :57, murulidhara wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> Currently Spec Says
>> “It is illegal to make an assignment to a variable that has not  
>> been explicitly declared using <var> or a var statement within  
>> a<script>. Attempting to assign to an undeclared variable causes an  
>> error.semantic event to be thrown.”
>> But , is this applicable to accessing also :
>> For ex:
>> <log expr =”varable_1”/>
>> variable_1 is not declared in entire document.
>> And log won’t modify or assign value to variable_1.
>> Does this cause error.semantic to be thrown by interpreter.  
>> Currently spec does not say accessing must result in throwing  
>> error.semantic.
>> One more typical example will be :
>> Accessing an optional attribute in an event. Using event 
>> $.optinal_attribute_name , does interpreter throw error.semantic if  
>> optinal_attribute_name is not set while throwing event to ccxml  
>> interpreter.
>> Regards,
>> Murali Dhara R
>>
>>
>> This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from  
>> HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose  
>> address is listed above. Any use of the information contained  
>> herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial  
>> disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than  
>> the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail  
>> in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately  
>> and delete it!
>>
>
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2008 14:06:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 31 January 2008 14:06:58 GMT