- From: Satish S <satish@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 20:38:37 +0100
- To: Patrick Ehlen <pehlen@attinteractive.com>
- Cc: Deborah Dahl <dahl@conversational-technologies.com>, "Young, Milan" <Milan.Young@nuance.com>, "DRUTA, DAN (ATTSI)" <dd5826@att.com>, "public-xg-htmlspeech@w3.org" <public-xg-htmlspeech@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <BANLkTikCFcdcdri+xgzx8GRd9RG8U1KS9Q@mail.gmail.com>
As an express goal, perhaps we should clearly state that applications that use the default/built-in recognizer should be portable across all browsers and speech engines. Beyond that, if the web app chooses to use a particular engine by specifying a URL it seems ok to rely on extended/additional capabilities provided by that engine. Cheers Satish On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 5:00 PM, Patrick Ehlen <pehlen@attinteractive.com>wrote: > Deborah is right that not all speech engines will have the same > capabilities, but we should strive to provide general parameterizations of > the potential capabilities wherever possible. Otherwise engine providers > will need to add their own extensions to the standard, and development will > get fractured across the lines of browser/engine, as we saw happen with > earlier Javascript XML handlers, etc. > > On Apr 20, 2011, at 8:27, "Deborah Dahl" < > dahl@conversational-technologies.com> wrote: > > > I don't think we can reach the goal of applications being completely > > portable across speech engines because speech engines will always have > > different capabilities, and some of these are unlikely to be in the scope > of > > our API. For example, engines will handle different languages, some > engines > > will be able to handle larger grammars, some applications will make use > of > > proprietary SLM's, and some applications won't be usable without an > engine > > that has a certain level of accuracy. So I agree with Milan that the > goal > > is not to standardize functionality across speech engines. I think we > should > > just say " provide the user with a consistent experience across different > > platforms and devices" and leave it at that. > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: public-xg-htmlspeech-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xg-htmlspeech- > >> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Satish S > >> Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 5:18 AM > >> To: Young, Milan > >> Cc: DRUTA, DAN (ATTSI); public-xg-htmlspeech@w3.org > >> Subject: Re: Overview paragraph > >> > >> >> provide the user with a consistent experience across different > >> platforms and devices irrespective of the speech engine used. > >> > >> > >> This effort is not about standardizing functionality across speech > >> engines. The goal is speech application portability across the > >> browsers. Simple applications MAY be portable across speech engine > >> boundaries, but that's not a requirement. > >> > >> > >> > >> I'd say the API proposal should aim for all applications to be portable > > across > >> speech engines. Starting with "may be portable" doesn't seem to fit the > > spirit > >> of the web. Any extensions for speech engine specific parameters and > >> results should be optional. > > > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 19:39:04 UTC