W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > July to September 2006

RE: Comments on LCWD, application.lastresult$

From: Tobias Göbel <tgoebel@voiceobjects.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 09:36:21 +0200
Message-ID: <8F6F2E324BF41B419EF75A80829F5EE532EDBD@mx04.voiceobjects.com>
To: "Shane Smith" <safarishane@gmail.com>, <www-voice@w3.org>
I have tested a number of platforms so far which support utterance recording. All except one fill the lastresult$ on a NoMatch event. And the one that currently doesn't claimed they will fix this some time soon.
The 2.0 spec says:
"All of the shadow variables described above are set immediately after any recognition. In this context, a <nomatch> event counts as a recognition, and causes the value of "application.lastresult$" to be set"
So it explicitly mentions that lastresult$ must be set in a NoMatch scenario.
To make things clearer, though, I agree that the 2.1 spec could and should also explicitly mention this fact.
In the example you mention, the application.lastresult$.recording is first assigned to a variable and then put in the submit's namelist. Is this really required? Again, all except one platform I've tested support having the application.lastresult$.recording itself in the namelist, without assigning it to a variable first. The spec should be clearer about this, too.
Thanks and regards
Tobias Goebel,-

-----Original Message-----
From: Shane Smith [mailto:safarishane@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 1:35 AM
To: www-voice@w3.org
Subject: Comments on LCWD, application.lastresult$

Hey Folks,

I think the behavior of application.lastresult$ needs clarification.  >From the 2.0 spec:

The number of application.lastresult$ elements is guaranteed to be greater than or equal to one and less than or equal to the system property "maxnbest". If no results have been generated by the system, then "application.lastresult$" shall be ECMAScript undefined.

The behavior on most platforms is that this array only exists when a valid result occurs. But, in 2.1, we introduce new behavior concerning utterance recording.  While recording user utterances on recognition is valuable, it's even *more* valuable to gather invalid recordings.... things that triggered a nomatch.  In fact, the example from lcwd shows exactly this:  

   <nomatch count="3">
     <var name="the_recording" 
     <submit method="post" 


Even reading the first 3 paragraphs of section seven give the impression that you need to actually have valid recognition for these shadow variables to become available.  I have yet to find a 2.1 compliant vendor that has offers anything in the lastresult array when a nomatch occurs, and I think we should offer some clarification on this change from 2.0. If it's in 2.1, then I missed it, sorry.

Shane Smith
Received on Wednesday, 13 September 2006 07:38:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:03:53 UTC