- From: Scott McGlashan <scott.mcglashan@pipebeach.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 15:57:05 +0100
- To: "Andras Micsik" <micsik@dsd.sztaki.hu>, <www-voice@w3.org>
Hi Andras, Sorry to take so long to respond. We would be very happy to receive your DTMF implementation report covering 60% of the VoiceXML 2.0 testsuite. We welcome partial reports like this, so don't feel that you have to cover 100% of the tests. Of the tests which use 'speech input and speech grammars', then I would suggest two alternatives: (a) If you generate an error.noresource error when encountering speech grammars, then the test will fail. However, you should indicate in the test report that you are a DTMF only browser, and that you generated error.noresource when running the test. (b) In configuring the testsuite for your browser, you need to write an xslt script which fits your platform (i.e. I assume you have already modified the sample irtest.xslt to fit your platform running in automatic mode). You could modify the definitions of conf:grammar and conf:speech to use DTMF grammars and DTMF input. Note that the tests themselves should require NO changes, just the stylesheet. If you make this type change - using DTMF instead of speech - I suggest that you indicate clearly in your implementation report that you have made this mode change and which tests are affected. We are looking forward to receiving your implementation report. Thanks Scott -----Original Message----- From: Andras Micsik [mailto:micsik@dsd.sztaki.hu] Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 17:16 To: www-voice@w3.org Subject: Question about VoiceXML Implementation Report and speech recognition Hello, our project develops an open source voice browser, and we are in the process of creating an implementation report for VoiceXML 2.0. Our voice browser handles most of VoiceXML 2.0, except speech recognition. We think that VoiceXML is very usable even without speech recognition, and multilinguality in Europe and Asia (we have Asian partner as well) puts an extra burden on adding speech recognition to voice browsers. Unfortunately, the test suite checks many features of VoiceXML (e.g. the correct implementation of FIA) through the use of speech input and speech grammars. This means that cca. 40% of the tests contains speech grammar, which in many cases could be substituted with a DTMF grammar, without loosing the test target (examples are assertions 143 and 1071). Our question is whether we can modify these tests to use DTMF input/grammar instead of speech input/grammar (where appropriate), and provide an implementation report using these tests? Best regards, Andras Micsik PublicVoiceXML project W3C Hungarian Office
Received on Friday, 28 March 2003 09:57:07 UTC