W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > April to June 2010


From: Chris Davis <davisc@iivip.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 09:25:02 -0500
Message-ID: <4C2A023E.4070805@iivip.com>
To: paolo.baggia@loquendo.com
CC: www-voice@w3.org

On June 7 I asked for but never received clarification as to why 
issue-677 was "reject".

I never heard the decision makers comment on the performance impacts of 
processing of ECMA (see 
nor was any defense offered about why a CCXML <transition> should have 
ECMA variable scoping
that is completely different from normal ECMA processing within CCXML's 
<script> tag

The current state of the recommendation and test cases is as follows:
1) <script> is fed to ECMA all at once and therefore uses normal ECMA 
scoping rules
2) <var> and <if> inside a <transition> are fed line-by-line resulting 
in new scoping behavior
different from normal ECMA

Why is this discrepancy ok?  Is any explanation coming?


Chris Davis
Interact Incorporated R&D
Received on Tuesday, 29 June 2010 14:25:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:03:56 UTC