W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: FW: Vxml grammar with termtimeout=0s. How should the intrepeter react?

From: David Nicol <davidnicol@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:12:15 -0500
Message-ID: <934f64a20809231112n6b96bd7epb7feb9288453dd7a@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Michel Brabants" <Michel.Brabants@telindus.be>
Cc: www-voice@w3.org

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 8:48 AM, Michel Brabants
<Michel.Brabants@telindus.be> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> (2nd time I'm sending because the first one seemingly didn't arrive.)
>
> I've written a small vxml-grammar and the product on which we use it is not
> reacting like I think it should. Could someone confirm or correct what the
> expected behaviour should be according to vxml 2.1?

the spec says: "If the termtimeout is 0s (the default), then the
recognized value is returned immediately after the last DTMF allowed
by the grammar, without waiting for the optional termchar. Note: the
termtimeout applies only when no additional input is allowed by the
grammar; otherwise, the interdigittimeout applies."

It appears to me that your expected behavior is correct, and the
product you are using is out-of-spec.  I would escalate this to their
support.  Grammar parsers are tricky things, and they probably aren't
testing for the corner case you present.  For instance, their parser
might think that up to eleven keypresses are allowed and send a lower
layer a request for up to eleven keypresses with a 3 sec timeout, then
work with what comes back, rather than requesting digits as they
appear.

If you revise to use a termchar instead of expecting the hardware
(which might be able to accept and respond to requests like "give me N
keypresses, with a T timeout" but nothing any more nuanced than that)
to understand a three-pronged state machine, do you get the results
you want?
Received on Tuesday, 23 September 2008 18:12:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 23 September 2008 18:12:53 GMT