- From: Serge LE HUITOUZE <slehuitouze@telisma.com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 15:03:58 +0100
- To: "Sturtevant Dean" <Dean.Sturtevant@comverse.com>, "Wyss, Felix" <FelixW@inin.com>, <www-voice@w3.org>
Sturtevant Dean wrote: > > I have a comment on one of Mr. Wyss's proposals. Note I am not > a member of any W3C committee: > > He said: > > 3) Clarification of GRR of external rule references > > > > Section 3.3.2 does not specify how the GRN of external rule > > references can be accessed in the referencing rule. I suggest > > that the GRN of external rule references is only available as > > $$ and its text variable as $$$.text in the referencing rule. > > Thus, there is no equivalence to "$rulename" for external > > rule references. If the value of the GRR is required past the > > next rule reference, it has to be assigned to a temporary > > variable. > > An alternate solution would be to extend the syntax of external > > rule references to allow specifying an alias for the GRR. > > For example: > > > > $rule = > > $<http://example.com/foo.gram>^<$foo> > > $<http://example.com/bar.gram>^<$bar> > > {$.result = $foo + $bar}; > > I respond: > There's no need for new syntax here. It seems that the following > should work (as is implemented on our platform): > $rule = > $<http://example.com/foo.gram#foo> > $<http://example.com/bar.gram#bar> > {$.result = $foo + $bar}; Regarding Dean's answer, it may be some kind of workaround, but is nothing near a general solution. What if an external rule reference is done without mentioning the rule name (because the referenced module has a root rule)? What about a rule like the following? $rule = $<http://example.com/foo.gram#r1> $<http://example.com/bar.gram#r1> {$.result = $r1 + $r1}; ^^^ ^^^ Regarding Felix Wyss's post, I'm glad to see that problems/omissions in the SISR standard are generating more posts! I posted two messages concerning SISR on www-voice in the last 6 months (10th June 2003, 30th July 2003), but there hasn't been any reaction on this list. This surprised and still surprises me, since I would imagine that contributors to said document are subcribers of this mailing list... Does someone know what the current status of SISR is? Is there any revision process planned? --Serge Le Huitouze
Received on Tuesday, 2 December 2003 09:04:00 UTC