- From: Deborah Dahl <Dahl@conversational-Technologies.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2022 15:02:35 -0500
- To: <public-voiceinteraction@w3.org>
Minutes from today's call https://www.w3.org/2022/02/23-voiceinteraction-minutes.html and below as text [1]W3C [1] https://www.w3.org/ - DRAFT - Voice Interaction 23 February 2022 [2]IRC log. [2] https://www.w3.org/2022/02/23-voiceinteraction-irc Attendees Present debbie, dirk, jim, jon, noreen, tobias, ulrike Regrets - Chair debbie Scribe ddahl Contents 1. [3]interfaces document Meeting minutes interfaces document [4]https://w3c.github.io/voiceinteraction/ voice%20interaction%20drafts/paInterfaces/paInterfaces.htm [4] https://w3c.github.io/voiceinteraction/voice interaction drafts/paInterfaces/paInterfaces.htm dirk: changes to interfaces document . changes to rename API providers as External, new version of architecture . External Data, Services, IPA providers . architecture is version 1.3 . also added descriptions to UML notation, added some links to explanation of UML dirk: looking at sequence diagram . added small internal call in case you don't need to access external services . or in case internal information supplements the external services . the internal "processDialogInput" is not optional . or it should be "processDialogInputs" ulrike: what's the difference between "processInput()" and "processDialogInput" dirk: "processInput" could trigger some internal "processDialogInput" dirk: should add some more descriptive text . "processInput" has two paths, local or external . both should be combined to determine the next dialog step . as a result, you may call an external service jim: change "opt" to "optional"? dirk: this is also standardized in UML . the "opt service call" is also part of "processInput()" ulrike: "processDialogInput" seems more like "process semantics" dirk: finally, "deliverResponse" and play back audio . "callService" is just a remote method call dirk: should I explain that this is one cycle tobias: there could be some indication that this could be a loop debbie: it would be useful to have captions on the figures dirk: it makes it clearer if everything has a return . tried to reduce the amount of interfaces we need to describe . could use "return value" instead of "clientResponse" debbie: return value is implicit in the client input call ulrike: is there something in the standard that would make this clearer? dirk: also changed table in interface client input and external client input debbie: do we have any way to report errors? dirk: could be in multimodal output or we could gloss over error case debbie: some kind of status dirk: have "call result details" in a service call, or should that be reflected in client interaction debbie: I think we should add that dirk: success indicator plus optionally more detailed description debbie: the user doesn't always need to know dirk: the call to the Dialog might also fail . then the Client needs to know . will add something to table in Section 4.3 . the next interface is External Client Input . return value is some semantic interpretation . arrays should be list, need to consider multi-intents dirk: nbest intents can be included in multiple interpretations . for multi-intents don't cover . yet tobias: what about a group of utterances with a similar meaning dirk: many different utterances can be mapped to an intent debbie: we should provide for multi-intents tobias: we might want to think about how other AI's annotate confidence . can we standardize confidence jim: confidence in AI's is not well-defined, they're just estimates dirk: still need to talk about External Service Call
Received on Wednesday, 23 February 2022 20:02:51 UTC