Comments on the VoiceXML 2.0 Working Draft 24 April 2002

Comments on the VoiceXML 2.0 Working Draft 24 April 2002

1. The index between Appendix N and Appendix P appears to be Appendix zero, not
   Appendix O.

2. In section 6.5, "Time Designations", the example "+1.5s" still contradicts
   the text, which describes the format as "an unsigned number followed by an
   optional time unit identifier".

3. Section 2.1.2.1 "Input Items" says that "implementations must handle the
   <object> element by throwing error.unsupported.object.objectname if the
   particular platform-specific object is not supported". Section 2.3.5
   "OBJECT" says that "implementations must handle the <object> element by
   throwing error.unsupported.object if the particular platform-specific object
   is not supported" (i.e. it does not include the object name in the event
   name).  Section 5.2.6 "Event Types" does not list any
   error.unsupported.object events, but does include error.unsupported.format,
   which is raised if "The requested resource has ... e.g. an unsupported ...
   object type". Could this be clarified?

4. Events such as error.unsupported.uri, error.unsupported.language,
    error.unsupported.format are ambiguous, since they could also be
    occurrences of error.unsupported.<element> if incorrect elements have been
    used in the VoiceXML document.

5. Section 6.1.2.1 says that "VoiceXML allows the author to control the caching
   policy for each use of each resource." Is this true of the application root
   document?

6. Regarding the "builtin" URI scheme,
   http://www.w3.org/Addressing/schemes#unreg says that "Unregistered schemes
   should not be deployed widely and should not be used except experimentally."
   Is there any intention to register the "builtin" scheme?

7. There is a typo "attibute" in the schema in Appendix O (in the
   xsd:annotation for the Accept.attrib attributeGroup).

8. The "minimal Conforming VoiceXML document" in appendix F1 is not minimal. As
   the text itself states, the XML declaration, and the xmlns:xsi and
   xsi:schemeLocation are not rqeuired for conformance.

Matthew Wilson

Received on Friday, 24 May 2002 04:34:17 UTC