- From: Hans Wennborg <hwennborg@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 14:00:49 +0100
- To: "Young, Milan" <Milan.Young@nuance.com>
- Cc: "public-speech-api@w3.org" <public-speech-api@w3.org>
On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Young, Milan <Milan.Young@nuance.com> wrote: > I suggest we add the following fields to the IDL for SpeechRecognitionResult > in section 5.1: > > readonly attribute DOMString transcript; > > readonly attribute float confidence; > > readonly attribute any interpretation; > > > > Section 5.1.6 would also need the following additions: > > transcript – Shortcut to the transcript property on the first > SpeechRecognitionAlternative (i.e. same value as item[0].transcript). > > confidence – Shortcut to the confidence property on the first > SpeechRecognitionAlternative (i.e. same value as item[0]. confidence). > > interpretation – Shortcut to the interpretation property on the first > SpeechRecognitionAlternative (i.e. same value as item[0]. interpretation). This sounds pretty reasonable. > Such a scheme carries the requirement that every recognition result has at > least one alternative (otherwise index out of bounds). But given that we > already have a way to communicate error results, I think this is OK. In > other words, I can’t think of a case where a successful recognition would > not contain at least one alternative. The 'nomatch' and 'resultdeleted' events also use the SpeechRecognitionResult interface, and at least for 'nomatch', there won't be any alternatives. I guess one solution would be to have the 'transcript', 'confidence', and 'interpretation' fields return null (or throw?) in that case? Thanks, Hans
Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2012 13:02:04 UTC