- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:10:47 -0400
- To: <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>
- Cc: <www-voice@w3.org>, <wai-liaison@w3.org>
At 08:04 PM 2003-08-08, Daniel Burnett wrote: >Dear Al/WAI-PF, > >Thank you for your review of the most recent SSML draft. Our responses >are below. > >If you believe we have not adequately addressed your issues with our >responses, please let us know as soon as possible. If we do not hear >from you within 14 days, we will take this as tacit acceptance. If >you believe you will need more time for review, we would appreciate >an estimate of how much time you will need. > > >3. VoiceXML took the 'audio' element from SSML, As a result of the Last >Call review of VoiceXML 2.0 this element got changed a bit. Please bring >the 'audio' element as used in SSML into agreement with the definition in >VoiceXML 2.0, including the specification language defining and describing >the 'desc' element. > >http://www.w3.org/Voice/Group/2002/voicexml20-disposition.htm#R478-1 > > >>> Proposed disposition: Rejected > >>> > >>> We believe the audio element is up to date. In what way is it not? I believe we should accept this disposition, based on reading http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-speech-synthesis-20021202/#edef_audio The rule for when to use 'desc' is there and there is a reference from the paragraph describing 'audio' to get you to this rule under 'desc'. Al
Received on Monday, 11 August 2003 16:10:53 UTC