- From: Hans Wennborg <hwennborg@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 14:57:57 +0100
- To: Bjorn Bringert <bringert@google.com>
- Cc: Conversational <dahl@conversational-technologies.com>, "public-speech-api@w3.org" <public-speech-api@w3.org>
OK, that would work I suppose. What would the spec text look like? Something like "[...] If no semantic meaning can be determined, the attribute will a string representing the raw words that the user spoke."? On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Bjorn Bringert <bringert@google.com> wrote: > Yeah, that would be my preference too. > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Conversational > <dahl@conversational-technologies.com> wrote: >> If there isn't an interpretation I think it would make the most sense for the attribute to contain the literal string result. I believe this is what happens in VoiceXML. >> >>> My question is: for implementations that cannot provide an >>> interpretation, what should the attribute's value be? null? undefined?
Received on Wednesday, 15 August 2012 13:58:44 UTC