- From: Baggia Paolo <paolo.baggia@loquendo.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 16:12:37 +0200
- To: Chris Davis <davisc@iivip.com>
- CC: Baggia Paolo <paolo.baggia@loquendo.com>, "www-voice@w3.org" <www-voice@w3.org>, W3C Voice Browser Working Group <w3c-voice-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <20E062AE0851CC41B7FBECC23638796F3946A3D761@GRFMBX704BA020.griffon.local>
Chris, in attachment is an updated version of 10_5_7/10_5_7_A.txml as a resolution of ISSUE-703, points #2 and #3. May I gently ask a quick review? We are close to publish again CCXML-IR after the resolution of all the IR ISSUES. Regards, Paolo Baggia Author of CCXML-IR Plan ________________________________________ From: Chris Davis [mailto:davisc@iivip.com] Sent: venerd́ 2 luglio 2010 15.44 To: Baggia Paolo Cc: www-voice@w3.org Subject: Re: April CCXML: 3 errors in 10_5_7_A.txml - [cc] ISSUE-703 For 2 & 3, sure send me the test to double-check. I am happy to help. Regards, Chris Baggia Paolo wrote: Chris, We are in the process to address all ISSUES related to IR. The goal is to re-publish the CCXML-IR in a short term. Please explicitly confirm that you accept the proposed resolution or after one week we will consider implicitly accepted the resolution. If you need clarification, please ask them very soon. Paolo Baggia Author of CCXML-IR Plan ISSUE-703: Here are the resolutions for your four issues: 1. Right, it will be fixed. 2./3. You are right, the difficult point is to test these features that have been declared 'at risk'. If you want, we might send you the test fixed to be double-checked before publication, but we have to be in synch about timings. ================================= This thread is tracked as ISSUE-703. --- RJ Auburn CTO, Voxeo Corporation tel:+1-407-418-1800 On May 18, 2010, at 4:28 PM, Chris Davis wrote: Hello www-voice, Here are the errors: 1) <if cond="sessions.conferences[A854_confid1].bridges.length == 1 There is no sessions scope. That needs to be session with no s 2) Assertion #854 as written will never work (see above fragment). The bridges property of the Conference object is defined in 10.3.1 as "an ECMAScript associative array". It is referenced by conference ids which are by definition URIs. The ECMA .length of an associative array is always zero. When you account for breaks 1) and 2), the broken segment: <if cond="sessions.conferences[A854_confid1].bridges.length == 1 && sessions.conferences[A854_confid2].bridges.length == 1"> thus becomes <if cond="session.conferences[A854_confid1].bridges[A854_confid2] != undefined && session.conferences[A854_confid2].bridges[A854_confid1] != undefined"> 3) TC#855 tries to look at the dialog objects to make sure the switching is correct. However, as written it doesn't account for all the switching. Specifically, the switching picture by the time #855 rolls around is: A855_dialogid1 <====> A855_dialogid2 A855_dialogid1 --> general_connid A855_dialogid2 --> A855_connid1 yet the check is written like this: <script><![CDATA[A855_passed = (session.dialogs[A855_dialogid1].input == A855_dialogid2 && session.dialogs[A855_dialogid2].input == A855_dialogid1 && session.dialogs[A855_dialogid1].outputs[0] == A855_dialogid2 && session.dialogs[A855_dialogid2].outputs[0] == A855_dialogid1); ]]></script> To check everything, the test should be something like this: <script><![CDATA[ function outputpresent( haystack, needle, numElements ) { var rc = false; for(i=0; i< numElements; i++ ) { if( haystack[i] == needle ) { rc = true; break; } } return rc; } A855_passed = false; if( session.dialogs[A855_dialogid1].outputs.length == 2 && session.dialogs[A855_dialogid2].outputs.length == 2) { if( session.dialogs[A855_dialogid1].input == A855_dialogid2 && session.dialogs[A855_dialogid2].input == A855_dialogid1 ) { if( true == outputpresent( session.dialogs[A855_dialogid1].outputs, general_connid, 2 )) { if( true == outputpresent( session.dialogs[A855_dialogid1].outputs, A855_dialogid2, 2 )) { if( true == outputpresent( session.dialogs[A855_dialogid2].outputs, A855_connid1, 2 )) { if(true == outputpresent( session.dialogs[A855_dialogid2].outputs, A855_dialogid1, 2 )) { A855_passed = true; } } } } } } ]]></script> //------------ Note that as written, the check currently leaves off some of the switch paths and assumes the secondary switch paths are in index position 0. Our browser adds new paths to the END of the array. If other behavior is desired we suggest it be placed in the Recommendation. Regards, Chris -- Chris Davis Interact Incorporated R&D 512-502-9969x117 -- Chris Davis Interact Incorporated R&D 512-502-9969x117
Attachments
- application/octet-stream attachment: 10_5_7_A.txml
Received on Wednesday, 7 July 2010 14:13:10 UTC