- From: Satish S <satish@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 17:31:01 +0100
- To: Jerry Carter <jerry@jerrycarter.org>
- Cc: "Young, Milan" <Milan.Young@nuance.com>, Hans Wennborg <hwennborg@google.com>, "public-speech-api@w3.org" <public-speech-api@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAHZf7RnJJTyNE-ayBgs6=QppGhsCwuNCFnOVqMdTAoocT6SVNA@mail.gmail.com>
Looks good. Should this go into a non-normative section? Cheers Satish On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Jerry Carter <jerry@jerrycarter.org> wrote: > > The challenge, here, is terminology. I agree that your scenario is valid > and regret that my choice of words is inadequate to express our agreement. > Let me offer this language: > > "The recognition service is expected to provide, as a default, a general > purpose grammar for common utterances. The capabilities of this grammar > and the domains covered will vary according to the capabilities of the > current recognition service. Application developers who want to ensure > coverage for specific utterances are encouraged to specify either a > specific recognition service or a specific grammar." > > Better? > > -=- Jerry > > > On Jun 20, 2012, at 12:14 PM, Satish S wrote: > > Shouldn't that be up to the UA to decide? One use case is if the device > did not have access to a recognizer capable of dictation-lite (e.g. > recognizer is remote and device has no network access at that moment) the > UA can decide to only use a local recognizer capable of recognizing names > from the contact list or apps installed and nothing else. > > Cheers > Satish > > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Jerry Carter <jerry@jerrycarter.org>wrote: > >> I concur that web search is inappropriate, but the specification should >> provide some expectation as to what the default grammar might be. >> >> If you want the default grammar to be of any general use, it would need >> to support common words & phrases for the current locality. It need not be >> as rich as a dedicated dictation grammar or support utterances as long as >> for diction tasks (though it could be). But I would expect a >> 'dictation-lite'. >> >> -=- Jerry >> >> On Jun 20, 2012, at 11:53 AM, Satish S wrote: >> >> The vast majority of web apps using speech API wouldn't be doing web >> search with the result so it would be good to not mention it in the spec. >> >> Cheers >> Satish >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Young, Milan <Milan.Young@nuance.com>wrote: >> >>> I also support the idea of the engine choosing behavior when no grammars >>> are present. But it would be nice to put in the spec a few examples of >>> what that default might be. Dictation and web search seem like good hints. >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Hans Wennborg [mailto:hwennborg@google.com] >>> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 8:27 AM >>> To: Jerry Carter >>> Cc: public-speech-api@w3.org >>> Subject: Re: Default value of SpeechRecognition.grammars >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Jerry Carter <jerry@jerrycarter.org> >>> wrote: >>> > Makes sense. I assume you are thinking that the default grammar should >>> be fairly broad, e.g. a dictation grammar. >>> >>> Yes, but I don't think we should specify what the default grammar should >>> be; it should be decided by the speech recognition engine. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Hans >>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2012 16:31:35 UTC