Re: CG for Speech JavaScript API

Just wondering why, in 2012, there are proposals for elements with abbreviated names. Please stop doing that.

<record> 

Is two characters longer and infinitely more intuitive. Say no to mistakes like <img>

Rick

On Jan 31, 2012, at 11:51 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> wrote:

> * Glen Shires wrote:
>> We at Google propose the formation of a new Community Group to pursue a
>> JavaScript Speech API. Specifically, we are proposing this Javascript API
>> [1], which enables web developers to incorporate speech recognition and
>> synthesis into their web pages, and supports the majority of use-cases in
>> the Speech Incubator Group's Final Report [2]. This API enables developers
>> to use scripting to generate text-to-speech output and to use speech
>> recognition as an input for forms, continuous dictation and control. For
>> this first specification, we believe this simplified subset API will
>> accelerate implementation, interoperability testing, standardization and
>> ultimately developer adoption.
> 
> Looking at "HTML Speech Incubator Group Final Report", there is a propo-
> sal for a <reco> element. Let's say the Community Group adopts this idea
> and several browser vendors implement it. Is the assumption that Mozilla
> would implement a <mozReco> element while Microsoft would implement some
> <msReco> element if they choose to adopt this, or would they agree on a
> <experimentalReco> element? Or would they implement a <reco> element? If
> they implement plain <reco>, there is not much room for a Working Group,
> where this might be standardized in the future, to make major changes,
> meaning they would be mostly rubber-stamping the Community Group output.
> -- 
> Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
> Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
> 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
>

Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2012 05:12:18 UTC