RE: Co-chair

Thank you Raj and Deborah for your support.  As for the questions coming from Google, I'd like to answer like this...
 
The HTML Speech XG group recently spent over a year gaining consensus on the use cases and requirements needed for an HTML Speech integration.  The findings were supported by several browser companies (including Google) and various expert representatives from the speech industry.

Support for EMMA (FPR-4) was the second-most demanded feature of such an API, yet this group has been haggling since inception on whether we need such a feature at all.  It would be one thing if the arguments were part of a grass roots movement across the industry, but they are not.  The opponents are almost unanimously aligned under the Google flag which holds both the chair and editor positions.  This doesn't feel like a community.

That said, I think both Hans and Glen have done a nice job whittling away at some of the baggage on the XG report that presented a barrier for browser adoption.  But I firmly believe that if we are to ever gain consensus on what an HTML/Speech marriage should be (prerequisite to a standards-track spec), we need equal participation from the speech industry.

Thanks

-----Original Message-----
From: Raj (Openstream) [mailto:raj@openstream.com] 
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 4:13 PM
To: Deborah Dahl; 'Glen Shires'; Young, Milan
Cc: public-speech-api@w3.org
Subject: Re: Co-chair

+1, I agree with Dr.Dahl and support Milan's candidacy for co-chair
position
for the CG.
--
Raj Tumuluri


On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 17:21:18 -0400
  "Deborah Dahl" <dahl@conversational-technologies.com> wrote:
> I think it would be very helpful to have Milan as a co-chair. I think 
>having  part of the CG's  leadership come from the speech industry will 
>help us  strike the appropriate balance between simplicity and 
>functionality for an  API that's widely useful in a range of 
>development scenarios.
> 
> 
> 
>From: Glen Shires [mailto:gshires@google.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 3:45 PM
> To: Young, Milan
> Cc: public-speech-api@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Co-chair
> 
> 
> 
> Milan,
> 
> I believe we are in agreement on all three priorities that you list, 
>and  that this CG is rapidly converging on a spec that meets those 
>criteria.
> (Note that this CG was formed just over two months ago).
> 
> 
> 
> I believe the simple, informal structure that we have now is working 
>well.
> We have healthy email discussions of the pros/cons of various issues, 
>and we  are converging on resolutions. Are there specific issues that 
>you believe  are not being addressed or resolved by the group in a 
>timely manner?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Glen Shires
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Young, Milan 
><Milan.Young@nuance.com>
> wrote:
> 
> I believe our community group has matured to the point where we would  
>benefit from a second chair.  I would like to volunteer for this 
>position.
> 
> 
> 
> If I were elected, I would operate on the following priorities:
> 
> .       Develop a specification that is attractive to the browser 
>vendors.
> This means cutting feature which are difficult to implement in the 
>interest  of widespread adoption.  I believe Glen and I are aligned on 
>this point.
> 
> .       Support a range of development use cases from the casual web 
>authors
> to the professionals.  This means making the easy things as easy as 
>possible  while at the same time giving the power users the features 
>they need for  enterprise-grade applications.
> 
> .       Plan to merge our work into an official standards-track 
>deliverable
> within the next year.
> 
> 
> 
> If any of you support these goals and believe I am qualified to 
>fulfill  these duties, please make your support known to this list.  If 
>you have  concerns regarding my abilities or would prefer another 
>representative,  please also feel free to discuss.
> 
> 
> 
> Note that the CG process doesn't define a formal process for chair 
>elections
> [1].  There is only the simple statement: "The participants of the 
>Group
> choose their Chair(s)."
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/community/about/agreements/

> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

--
NOTICE TO RECIPIENT:  
THIS E-MAIL IS  MEANT FOR ONLY THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OF THE TRANSMISSION, AND MAY BE A COMMUNICATION PRIVILEGED BY LAW.  IF YOU RECEIVED THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS E-MAIL IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY OF THE ERROR BY RETURN E-MAIL AND PLEASE DELETE THIS MESSAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR COOPERATION. 
Reply to : legal@openstream.com

Received on Monday, 11 June 2012 23:31:40 UTC