[minutes] 9 June 2011 telecon

Group,

The minutes from today's call are available at http://www.w3.org/2011/06/09-htmlspeech-minutes.html 
.

For convenience, a text version is embedded below.

Thanks to Raj Tumuluri for taking the minutes!

-- dan

**********************************************************************************


    Present
           Dan_Burnett, Raj_Tumuluri, Michael_Bodell, Paolo_Baggia,
           Patrick_Ehlen, Michael_Johnston, Marc_Schroeder, Milan_Young,
           Dan_Druta, Charles_Hemphill, Robert_Brown, Debbie_Dahl

    Regrets
           Bjorn_Bringert, Olli_Pettay

    Chair
           Dan Burnett

    Scribe
           Raj_Tumuluri

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]F2F minutes, no comments from the participants
          2. [6]Updated Final Report Document
          3. [7]Sub-group reports...start with the protocol group,
             Robert to start
          4. [8]Report from WebAPI group, Michael Bodell to present
             update
      _________________________________________________________


    <mbodell> people interested in API: Dan Druta, possibly Charles

F2F minutes, no comments from the participants

Updated Final Report Document

    <burn>
    [10]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/htmlspeech/live/NOTE-htmlspeech
    -20110609.html

      [10] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/htmlspeech/live/NOTE-htmlspeech-20110609.html

    Dan: Sent updated the document sent few days back with Michael
    Bodell's comments on use-cases, proposed solutions as well as
    updates from the last week's call..Any comments?

    No comments from the group

Sub-group reports...start with the protocol group, Robert to start

    Robert: Lot of people want to contribute, posted comments to the
    distribution list..

    <Robert>
    [11]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-htmlspeech/2011Jun
    /0002.html

      [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-htmlspeech/2011Jun/0002.html

    Looking to finalize by August and give 2 weeks for comments

    Robert: General design approach and gleaned requirements on
    protocols from the requirements docs..draft to be ready in June and
    refinements in July
    ... No comments from the group

    <Robert>
    [12]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-htmlspeech/2011Jun
    /att-0008/speech-protocol-basic-approach-01.html

      [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-htmlspeech/2011Jun/att-0008/speech-protocol-basic-approach-01.html

    Robert: Overall design approach: use web-sockets transport, text
    msgs for signaling and binary for media, included the proposal link
    ... Control msgs will be based on MRCP
    ... In the coming weeks flesh this out..

    <Robert>
    [13]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-htmlspeech/2011Jun
    /0020.html

      [13] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-htmlspeech/2011Jun/0020.html

    Robert: Next steps to refine the design : Next week, Milan is going
    to compile a sub-set of MRCP for HTML+Speech, and then identify any
    other control msgs, we may need, in parallel look at media
    translation
    ... Will provide an update next week

    Michael_: audio

    Robert: Requirements list is another topic:

    <Robert>
    [14]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-htmlspeech/2011Jun
    /att-0011/protocol-reqs.html

      [14] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-htmlspeech/2011Jun/att-0011/protocol-reqs.html

    Robert: Marc has sifted through this and slotted those for easy
    reading..

    <Robert>
    [15]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-htmlspeech/2011Jun
    /0019.html

      [15] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-htmlspeech/2011Jun/0019.html

    <Robert> those are my comments

    Robert: Some of these requirements may be invalid, given our recent
    discussions, encourage others to go through

    Dan: We are missing 2 of our browser vendors today, afraid we may
    not be able to make any design decisions today...
    ... May be better to defer that for the next call when they are
    there...

    Robet: OK with that..certainly comments I re-wrote were discussed at
    F2F and subsequently..since most of those are re-phrased, there may
    not be anything controversial

    Michael_: DD35 may need to be reviewed

    Dan: We will let people review and comment by next week..since it is
    only correction and not anything new..
    ... Some of the requirements are left in general section...need to
    review the grouping etc..based on the design-decisions we need to
    make on them

    Robert: If anybody has any observations, and identify changes, that
    will help in the prep of next draft
    ... This is not the complete list, Marc has the protocol related
    list

    Marc: It would not be right choice to move them all to protocol
    section...keep numbering intact...lot of legacy reqs..present..feel
    it needs to updated to reflect the latest position

    Dan: Will schedule something in the comign weeks

Report from WebAPI group, Michael Bodell to present update

    <burn> Michael's plan:
    [16]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-htmlspeech/2011Jun
    /0021.html

      [16] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-htmlspeech/2011Jun/0021.html

    mbodell: posted the update last night...most participants are not on
    the call..want to make sure that the list of participants updated as
    well..

    Dan: I am in both Protocol and WebAPI..

    mbodell: Bjorn, dan, dahl, olli, mbodell, danD, Charles

    Raj: I will be in protocol group

    Robert: We have many people, they may not have enough work to
    write..but can review

    mbodell: Produce something similar to what Marc produced for
    Protocol for WebAPI, on design decisions and appraches
    ... identify and obtain concensus on parameters, events and naming..
    ... markup bindings, associations, need to agree what we can agree
    and document what we cannot agree on that..
    ... we may also consider having a group call a la protocol
    group...for now can do this through email..

    Dan: makes sense, I would object to adding another half hour to this
    call...should you really need we can accommodate that as part of the
    existing call itself..and allocated 30 minutes for that

    mbodell: OK with that..
    ... design decisions: other than markup bindings, there were no
    major decisions..

    Dan: IDL and boundaries decisions needed some review..any update on
    decisions

    mbodell: we may say nBest number and create a prooperty describe
    that in text..
    ... functions to do the recog., results and text to describe

    Dan: Agreeing on basic design approach need not be today..but, I see
    mbodell expects to agree on the approach today and flesh out details
    in subgroup..any objections?

    Robert: Only concern is that key people ( browser vendors) are not
    on call.( Olli and Bjorn)

    Dan: Olli's concerns were around security and he may not have
    objections to approach

    mbodell: if group doesn't agree completely, then we will document
    the objections/disagreements

    Dan: Noted that there is general consensus, noting Google and
    Mozilla may be orthogonal

    mbodell: Javascript recognition result is the point of concern
    ... the objections Olli has may not affect the rest of the approach

    Dan: if they affect the rest of the API, that can be resolved in
    sub-group

    mbodell: yes, and if any new objections are found, they can be
    discussed in subgroup too

    <burn> actually, point of concern is not JS reco result, but how you
    bind to HTML markup

    Dan: Any other comments from anybody ? Since we are missing key
    browser vendors, am concerned about moving forward with design
    decisions

    mbodell: reviewing the design requirements for APIs ( a la Marc's
    work on protocol)
    ... any volunteers

    I volunteer for that

    mbodell: another task that needs a volunteer is how to handle
    results from continuous reco, grammar conversation, IDL and text
    etc..we can do that in parallel

    Dan_Druta: we discussed at F2F capabilities and that also needs to
    be fleshed ..and volunteer to do that..

    dahl: put skeleton document on what needs to be fleshed and assign
    people to sections

    mobdell & Dan_Druita: agree

    ddahl: want to look at the list and pick that are most interesting
    ;-)

    mbodell: to prepare the list and circulate

    Dan: prepared to postpone remaining items to next week..anything
    else to discuss today?
    ... thanks group

-- dan

Received on Thursday, 9 June 2011 21:16:08 UTC