RE: Please review requirements carefully

I think we should have a slight wording change of FPR9.

Currently FPR9 reads:

FPR9. If browser refuses, it must inform the web app.

I think this assumes that we'll be reading the FPR in numeric order and understand the missing reference but given the reorganization I think this should be reworded as:

FPR9. If browser refuses to use the web application requested speech service, it must inform the web app.

From: Dan Burnett [mailto:dburnett@voxeo.com]
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 2:21 AM
To: Michael Bodell
Cc: public-xg-htmlspeech@w3.org
Subject: Please review requirements carefully

Welcome back and Happy New Year!

We will very shortly be prioritizing our First Pass requirements.  If any requirement is not currently clear enough to prioritize, send clarification text or supplemental text to the list IMMEDIATELY.
This means that if your personal understanding of the requirement as listed is not clear enough that you could assign an importance to it for yourself/your organization, then you need to speak up.

-- dan

On Dec 22, 2010, at 6:49 PM, Michael Bodell wrote:


I've updated the latest requirements draft (http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/htmlspeech/live/draft-20101223-requirements.html) which includes the 7 new requirements from the last teleconference (http://www.w3.org/2010/12/16-htmlspeech-minutes.html), moves the old section 3 into an Appendix (and removes the strikeout), and tries to start the organization of the first pass requirements.  I've provided a two level organization structure that makes sense to me in the table of contents (First: Is it a feature requirement? An ease of authoring requirement? Or a security/privacy requirement?; Second: Does it apply to speech services [both reco and synth]? Does it apply to just reco? Does it apply to just synth?) that helps to provide some structure to the document.  I haven't reordered requirements inside of these levels (I.e., putting ones that are similar near each other beyond original order) and I haven't renamed/renumbered the requirements yet nor reordered the content.  I'm holding off on renaming as it makes it harder to track changes and also renaming and reordering the content takes a decent chunk of time and I want to make sure we like this ordering before committing to that.  Probably a good topic for our first January call.

Reminder that if any requirement is not currently clear enough to prioritize to send clarification text or supplemental text to the list.

Hope everyone has a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!