- From: MattO <matto@tellme.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 17:13:59 -0800
- To: <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: <www-voice@w3.org>
Dear Dan, In response to your request [1], the VBWG requested feedback from the XML Core Working Group [2] on the use of a Processing Instruction in the VoiceXML 2.1 specification. The XML Core WG concluded there is "no strong technical argument against using a PI in this case" [3]. This conclusion was reiterated in [4]. We hope this addresses your concerns. If you are not satisfied with the XML Core WG's response or the Voice Browser Working Group's decision to leave the Processing Instruction as-is in Appendix E of VoiceXML 2.1, let us know if would like us to register your formal objection in the VoiceXML 2.1 Disposition of Comments as we present the VoiceXML 2.1 specification for consideration as a Candidate Recommendation. Sincerely, Matt Oshry [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2005JanMar/0075.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2005JanMar/0074.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2005JanMar/0078.html [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2005JanMar/0080.html
Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2005 01:14:31 UTC