RE: R: Comments on the Last Call Working Draft of the PLS specification (R105)

Dear Paolo,
 
This resolution is acceptable.
 
regards,
 
Debbie


  _____  

From: Baggia Paolo [mailto:paolo.baggia@loquendo.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 10:33 AM
To: Deborah Dahl
Cc: Baggia Paolo; www-voice@w3.org
Subject: Re: R: Comments on the Last Call Working Draft of the PLS
specification (R105)



Dear Debbie,

 

we clarified the situation by splitting the R105 into two parts:

 

R105-1

It is focused on the main requests:

- "Pronunciation lexicons might be exposed through the Delivery

Context Interfaces (DCI)[2]."

- "PLS might be useful for spelling correction"

 

As regards DCI, being that this is a first generation document, the

immediate focus has been on providing the functionality necessary

for existing specifications, we think that it will be considered

for future versions which will be asked to serve broader classes of

applications and different architectures.

 

While on spelling correction if there are other requirements

from MMI for specific uses, we can collect them for a future

version of PLS.

 

Resolution: Deferred



R105-2

which is focused on the:

"Current synthesizers are weak with respect to contextualized

pronunciations and it is desirable that PLS provide a convenient

means for application developers to work around that, i.e. more

convenient than providing explicit pronunciations in SSML for each

occurrence of a word that would otherwise be mispronounced."

 

and it will be addressed by a new "role" attribute to be

added to next draft that will address this issue.

 

Resolution: Accepted

 

Please indicate whether you are satisfied with the VBWG's resolution, 

whether you think there has been a misunderstanding, or whether you 

wish to register an objection.

 

Paolo Baggia, editor PLS spec.

 
-----Messaggio originale-----
From: Baggia Paolo <
<mailto:paolo.baggia@loquendo.com?Subject=Re%3A%20R%3A%20Comments%20on%20the
%20Last%20Call%20Working%20Draft%20of%20the%20%20PLS%20specification%20(R105
)&In-Reply-To=%253CF534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B295571696C6A%40PTPEVS106BA020.i
dc.cww.telecomitalia.it%253E&References=%253CF534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B29557
1696C6A%40PTPEVS106BA020.idc.cww.telecomitalia.it%253E>
paolo.baggia@loquendo.com> 
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 10:13:45 +0200
Message-ID:
<F534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B295571696C6A@PTPEVS106BA020.idc.cww.telecomitalia
.it> 
To: "Deborah Dahl" <
<mailto:dahl@conversational-technologies.com?Subject=Re%3A%20R%3A%20Comments
%20on%20the%20Last%20Call%20Working%20Draft%20of%20the%20%20PLS%20specificat
ion%20(R105)&In-Reply-To=%253CF534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B295571696C6A%40PTPEV
S106BA020.idc.cww.telecomitalia.it%253E&References=%253CF534D6940BB4C4478745
90AC0B295571696C6A%40PTPEVS106BA020.idc.cww.telecomitalia.it%253E>
dahl@conversational-technologies.com>, <
<mailto:www-voice@w3.org?Subject=Re%3A%20R%3A%20Comments%20on%20the%20Last%2
0Call%20Working%20Draft%20of%20the%20%20PLS%20specification%20(R105)&In-Repl
y-To=%253CF534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B295571696C6A%40PTPEVS106BA020.idc.cww.te
lecomitalia.it%253E&References=%253CF534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B295571696C6A%4
0PTPEVS106BA020.idc.cww.telecomitalia.it%253E> www-voice@w3.org> 
Cc: "Baggia Paolo" <
<mailto:paolo.baggia@loquendo.com?Subject=Re%3A%20R%3A%20Comments%20on%20the
%20Last%20Call%20Working%20Draft%20of%20the%20%20PLS%20specification%20(R105
)&In-Reply-To=%253CF534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B295571696C6A%40PTPEVS106BA020.i
dc.cww.telecomitalia.it%253E&References=%253CF534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B29557
1696C6A%40PTPEVS106BA020.idc.cww.telecomitalia.it%253E>
paolo.baggia@loquendo.com> 
 
Dear Debbie,
 
you are perfectly right. I mis-classified your comment. The
comment concerning DCI has been "Deferred" and the one
on spelling correction has been "Accepted".
 
If you agree, I'll split your comment into two requests:
- R105-1 Accepted
  the first part which concludes with spelling correction.
- R105-2 Deferred
  the last part on DCI
 
Did I clarify your comment?
 
Are you satisfied with these two VBWG's resolution?
 
Regards,
Paolo Baggia, editor PLS spec.
 
-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: Deborah Dahl [mailto:
<mailto:dahl@conversational-technologies.com?Subject=Re%3A%20R%3A%20Comments
%20on%20the%20Last%20Call%20Working%20Draft%20of%20the%20%20PLS%20specificat
ion%20(R105)&In-Reply-To=%253CF534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B295571696C6A%40PTPEV
S106BA020.idc.cww.telecomitalia.it%253E&References=%253CF534D6940BB4C4478745
90AC0B295571696C6A%40PTPEVS106BA020.idc.cww.telecomitalia.it%253E>
dahl@conversational-technologies.com] 
Inviato: giovedì 27 luglio 2006 21.20
A: Baggia Paolo;
<mailto:www-voice@w3.org?Subject=Re%3A%20R%3A%20Comments%20on%20the%20Last%2
0Call%20Working%20Draft%20of%20the%20%20PLS%20specification%20(R105)&In-Repl
y-To=%253CF534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B295571696C6A%40PTPEVS106BA020.idc.cww.te
lecomitalia.it%253E&References=%253CF534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B295571696C6A%4
0PTPEVS106BA020.idc.cww.telecomitalia.it%253E> www-voice@w3.org
Oggetto: RE: Comments on the Last Call Working Draft of the PLS
specification (R105)
 
Dear Paolo,
Thank you for your response. I have one clarification question, which
is that you have classified our comments as 'accepted', but in the
case of the comments on DCI and spelling correction, it's not clear
what action will be taken as a result of the comments, consequently, it's
not
clear what 'accepted' means for those two comments. I would be very
grateful if you could clarify this point.
 
regards,
 
Debbie Dahl
Multimodal Interaction Working Group Chair
 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Baggia Paolo [mailto:
<mailto:paolo.baggia@loquendo.com?Subject=Re%3A%20R%3A%20Comments%20on%20the
%20Last%20Call%20Working%20Draft%20of%20the%20%20PLS%20specification%20(R105
)&In-Reply-To=%253CF534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B295571696C6A%40PTPEVS106BA020.i
dc.cww.telecomitalia.it%253E&References=%253CF534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B29557
1696C6A%40PTPEVS106BA020.idc.cww.telecomitalia.it%253E>
paolo.baggia@loquendo.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 11:13 AM
> To: www-voice@w3.org
<mailto:www-voice@w3.org?Subject=Re%3A%20R%3A%20Comments%20on%20the%20Last%2
0Call%20Working%20Draft%20of%20the%20%20PLS%20specification%20(R105)&In-Repl
y-To=%253CF534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B295571696C6A%40PTPEVS106BA020.idc.cww.te
lecomitalia.it%253E&References=%253CF534D6940BB4C447874590AC0B295571696C6A%4
0PTPEVS106BA020.idc.cww.telecomitalia.it%253E> ; Deborah Dahl
> Cc: Baggia Paolo
> Subject: Re: Comments on the Last Call Working Draft of the 
> PLS specification (R105)
> 
> Issue R105
>  
> Proposed Classification: Clarification / Typo / Editorial 
>  
> Resolution: Accepted
>  
> ---- Dear Debbie,
> 
> Thank you for these thoughts.  As a first generation document, the
> immediate
> focus has been on providing the functionality necessary for existing
> specifications.  Your comments concerning DCI and spelling correction
> remind
> us that future versions may be asked to serve broader classes of
> applications and different architectures.
> 
> Several reviewers have requested support for pronunciation selection.
> The
> next draft of the PLS specification will describe a system 
> for labeling
> each
> <lexeme> with a 'role' attribute.  Users of PLS will be able 
> to use the
> 'role' for more precise targeting than allowed solely by the 
> <grapheme>.
> 
> Please indicate whether you are satisfied with the VBWG's resolution,
> whether you think there has been a misunderstanding, or 
> whether you wish
> to register an objection.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Paolo Baggia, editor PLS spec.

 


Gruppo Telecom Italia - Direzione e coordinamento di Telecom Italia S.p.A.

================================================
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons
above and may contain confidential information. If you have received
the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof
is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete
the message. Should you have any questions, please send an e_mail to
<mailto:webmaster@telecomitalia.it>webmaster@telecomitalia.it. Thank you
<http://www.loquendo.com>www.loquendo.com
================================================