Re: EMMA in Speech API (was RE: Speech API: first editor's draft posted)

>
> I would prefer having an easy solution for the majority of apps which
> just want the interpretation, which is either just a string or a JS
> object (when using SISR). Boilerplate code sucks. Having EMMA
> available sounds ok too, but that seems like a minority feature to me.
>

Seems like the current type "any" is suited for that. Since SISR represents
the results of semantic interpretation as ECMAScript that is interoperable
and non-proprietary, the goal of a cross-browser semantic interpretation
format seems satisfied. Are there other reasons to add EMMA support?

Received on Monday, 21 May 2012 16:17:25 UTC