- From: Hans Wennborg <hwennborg@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 10:04:12 +0100
- To: Satish S <satish@google.com>
- Cc: olli@pettay.fi, "Young, Milan" <Milan.Young@nuance.com>, Deborah Dahl <dahl@conversational-technologies.com>, Bjorn Bringert <bringert@google.com>, Glen Shires <gshires@google.com>, "public-speech-api@w3.org" <public-speech-api@w3.org>
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:31 AM, Satish S <satish@google.com> wrote: > In any case, looks like there is enough interest both from speech & browser > vendors to have this attribute always non-null. So I'm fine making it so. I > like the first proposal from Milan: > ---- > Addition to SpeechRecognitionResult (section 5.1) > > readonly attribute DOMString emma; > > And the corresponding addition to 5.1.6: > emma - A string representation of the XML-based <link>EMMA 1.0</link> > result. (link points to http://www.w3.org/TR/emma/ > ---- > > This spec proposal shouldn't mandate specific fields any more than what EMMA > does already so that web apps can point to existing recognizers and get EMMA > data in the same format as they would get otherwise. Earlier in the thread, I thought we decided that it was better to make the emma attribute be of type Document rather than DOMString?
Received on Friday, 8 June 2012 09:05:05 UTC