[minutes] 01 December 2011

Group,

The minutes from today's call are available at http://www.w3.org/2011/12/01-htmlspeech-minutes.html

For convenience, a text version is embedded below.

Thanks to Michael Johnston for taking the minutes.

-- dan

**********************************************************************************
              HTML Speech Incubator Group Teleconference

01 Dec 2011

   [2]Agenda

      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-htmlspeech/2011Nov/0074.html

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/12/01-htmlspeech-irc

Attendees

   Present
          Dan_Burnett, Matt_Womer, Michael_Johnston, Avery_Bishop,
          Olli_Pettay, Glen_Shires, Dan_Druta, Charles_Hemphill,
          Bjorn_Bringert, Satish_Sampath, Debbie_Dahl

   Regrets
   Chair
          Dan Burnett

   Scribe
          Michael_Johnston

Contents

     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]discussion of where work should continue
     * [6]Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________


discussion of where work should continue

   danb: few weeks back difference of opinion on where work should
   continue

   bjorn: We've discussed internally how we'd like to proceed with the
   Speech XG proposal, and concluded that the best way to get wide
   feedback and implementation would be to take it to the W3C WebApps
   WG. The WebApps WG is a good fit because all major browser-vendors
   and lots of independent web-developers are already involved,
   providing the necessary diverse perspective and buy-in. To keep the
   discussion manageable and within the scope of the WebApps WG, we
   ... I. A scripting-only subset supports the vast majority of the
   use-cases and samples in the XG proposal.
   ... Webapps group has wide participation from browser vendors
   ... have done many programmatic apis
   ... first step to post specification to webapps

   satish: we reached out to chairs
   ... heard back from one of them, arthur barstow, sounded interested
   but no guarantee, they are rechartering just now

   glen: from both chairs, while back said could be a good fit

   <matt> [[Everyone has to rejoin after rechartering.]]

   satish: reached out to browser vendors, already in there

   <glen> Arthur Barstow, webapps chair, has responded, saying timing
   is good

   burn: working still on report

   matt: if new ip is added could affect recharter

   burn: other chair is Charles McCathieNevile

   satish: last year charles said he and some people at opera might be
   able to participate

   bjorn: can take it there for feedback before adding to charter

   burn: make clear report is not final yet
   ... once final everyone is free to distribute to whichever group
   they think may be interested
   ... we should be able to keep the list as a place to hold comments

   avery: could still go forward with original plan and still get
   feedback from webapps working group by keeping them involved and
   attending as observers

   burn: tend to agree is not an either or
   ... no harm in having discussion in multiple places

   avery: webapps have wide charter
   ... attention diluted

   bjorn: smaller slice of a bigger cake

   satish: hoping all with participate and move it along

   bjorn: not much time on call but time on mailing list
   ... largely in mailing list

   <smaug> right now webapps doesn't have conf calls

   olli: webapps right now does not have conference calls

   michael: APIs listed are more core web programming, DOM, events,
   XMLhttprequest, not seeing anything in there like speech
   ... websockets is there but your proposal is just to take the
   scripting there

   danD: keeping focus, audio group has more significant impact on our
   decisions in speech, dependencies on DAP
   ... new and innovative web technology, will dilute value in webapps
   group

   bjorn: why lose focus

   danD: another tool in toolbox but easily buried among all that is in
   webapps

   bjorn: more of a marketing of spec issue

   danD: that is a part of it

   bjorn: marketing is super important, does not bear on working group
   we are in

   satish: find talk times in developer conferences
   ... file api, has its own top level uri

   bjorn: argue webapps makes work more visible

   <glen> * we could agree to a keyword like [speech] that we all put
   in the title of emails, to make it easy to filter all emails from
   WebApps

   olli: would be ok to put a small part in webapps, filesystem part is
   not reviewed at all
   ... does not guarantee feedback
   ... not a lot of attention to widget apis

   <smaug> ...but wouldn't object a separate group either

   michael: another option is to have a coordinating group, our work
   needs to reach out to IETF for the protocol to webapps for the api,
   possible requirements to multimodal for EMMA

   glen: so standards work would be outside of the coordinating group

   bjorn: focus on script API, protocol is separate matter

   <burn> web app charter liaison:
   [7]http://www.w3.org/2010/webapps/charter/Overview.html#coordination

      [7] http://www.w3.org/2010/webapps/charter/Overview.html#coordination

   burn: looking at what would need to be added, audio, streaming media

   bjorn: seems like reasonable things to add

   avery: have to be careful working with IETF, end up working with 2
   or 3 individuals who know what they are doing,

   and 100 tire kickers that slow the work

   avery: sip as example

   <ddahl1> "protocols and formats" is a WG under the web accessibility
   initiative (WAI), so it means "protocols and formats for
   accessibility". WAI has other WG's, for example, they have an
   "education and outreach" group

   bjorn: valid concern
   ... could have web side drowned out by more speech people

   avery: not sure staging it there is the right place

   charles: limit to scripting, is there any tag work there

   bjorn: not sure if there is no tags

   charles: want to get feedback on tag work from web developers

   bjorn: bring whole spec to webapps at first

   satish: we were first to suggest markup

   bjorn: might have to be done in separate batch

   michael: concern about moving forward with scripting without
   protocol work

   glen: protocol in ietf and scripting in other group, would have to
   be separate anyway

   michael: not sure that peer to peer coordination will work or
   whether we need coordinating group

   burn: need large overlap between the groups

   michael: webrtc and rtcweb, two groups that work well together

   <glen> webrtc is W3C, rtcweb is IETF

   michael: have to remain in sync, since the app is real time
   communication

   burn: disagreements in rtc work about how to transmit coordinated
   media

   danD: want to make sure that remote speech engine is selectable by
   the developer

   burn: need to continue to be developed together

   bjorn: want to avoid mutual dependency where hold up in protocol
   would hold up the script api

   burn: need large overlap in groups working on both so they are kept
   in sync

   michael: want to avoid going back to place where speech input to
   google page on ie goes to microsoft and bing speech traffic on
   chrome goes to google

   burn: meta level, start sending stuff to webapps, can also start
   process of creating a charter, does not necessarily end up in
   forming a group
   ... doesnt mean there are not technical discussion

   michael: need to avoid losing the momentum the HTML+SPEECH group has
   had this last period
   ... webapps could accelerate but could also slow down
   ... tremendous amount of work has happened in the incubator

   burn: planning for 15 minute call next week
   ... we should wait to distribute until the report is finalized

   bjorn: wait for that then post once it is tidied up

Received on Thursday, 1 December 2011 18:24:32 UTC