- 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