Re: speech API proposal (from Microsoft)

On 03/11/2011 10:57 PM, Robert Brown wrote:
> [Also replying to Olli’s comments
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-htmlspeech/2011Mar/0007.html
> to consolidate the thread]
>
> Thanks to both of you for your feedback.
>
> Section 6.1:
>
> <<Olli>> Have you investigated if HTML <device> could be used, instead
> of Capture API?
>
> We think the <device> API has too much ambiguity and needs a lot more
> work. Capture looks like the better path today if we want interoperable
> implementations.

FYI, <device> element has now been removed from HTML spec and there is 
now a new API proposal. I haven't yet reviewed the new API.
http://my.opera.com/core/blog/2011/03/14/web-meet-device



> <<Olli>> I doubt send(in Stream) will be ever accepted to XHR.
>
> We disagree on this one. XHR already has send(Blob), and it already
> streams over HTTP. Seems like a no-brainer to connect the dots on this.
> Tell us what we’re missing.
>
Stream and Blob are very different. You don't usually know the size of
the Stream when you're uploading the data. Sending a Blob is defined so
that when xhr.send(blob) is called, blob's raw data at that point
will be uploaded.


Btw, WebSocket's protocol problem should be resolved soon, I hope.
( https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=640003 )



-Olli

Received on Monday, 14 March 2011 13:08:15 UTC