Re: Call for final specification commitments

Yes, let's address those issues...

I have now proposed the change to fix EventTarget. [1]
The proposals for the other open issues are:
  [2] omit "static" from interface SpeechSynthesis.
  [3] omit copy of utterance in speak() method.

As for the spec name: in my opinion "Web Speech API" is a good name, any
disagreement with this name?

 Glen Shires

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-speech-api/2012Oct/0057.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-speech-api/2012Oct/0056.html
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-speech-api/2012Oct/0050.html


On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Olli Pettay <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>wrote:

> On 10/14/2012 01:17 AM, Glen Shires wrote:
>
>> The spec is looking pretty solid, so as is common practice for a
>> Community Group, I propose to take a snapshot of the spec on Friday October
>> 19 and
>> call for final specification commitments.
>>
>> Glen Shires
>>
>>
>
> IMHO, Speech synthesis part is quite far from "solid" API.
> As an example currently nothing in the spec is marked as EventTarget yet
> there are some
> event handlers (which ofc can't fire because there is no target etc.)
>
>
> Also, the spec name sure shouldn't be
> Speech JavaScript API Specification,
> but something like Speech API or Web Speech API ;)
>
>
>
> -Olli
>