- From: Petr Kuba <kuba@optimsys.cz>
- Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 15:53:53 +0200
- To: Baggia Paolo <paolo.baggia@loquendo.com>
- CC: "'www-voice@w3.org'" <www-voice@w3.org>, 'RJ Auburn' <rj@voxeo.com>
Paolo, You are correct, I misinterpreted the test. Sorry for the noise. Regards, Petr On 27.8.2010 14:51, Baggia Paolo wrote: > Petr, > > We are in the process to address all ISSUES related to IR. The goal is to finalize the test-suite during the PR transition. > Please explicitly confirm that you accept the proposed resolution or after one week we will consider it implicitly accepted. > If you need clarifications, please ask them very soon. > > Paolo Baggia > Author of CCXML-IR Plan > > ISSUE-745: > > We suspect you misinterpreted the test. The 'general_connid' is correct, while 'session.values.sessionOneConnID' is also correct but cannot be used because it belongs to another section. > > This to test the following assertion #962: > "Any Connections or Dialogs referenced by the 'id1' and 'id2' attributes > of join MUST be owned by the session performing the join." > > Therefore an error.conference.join must be generated. > > ================================= > From: RJ Auburn<rj@voxeo.com> > Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 10:58:31 -0400 > Cc: www-voice<www-voice@w3.org>, W3C Voice Browser Working Group<w3c-voice-wg@w3.org> > Message-Id:<353C9667-B12C-446C-8E42-F7AF3952796E@voxeo.com> > To: Petr Kuba<kuba@optimsys.cz> > > Ok, I take that back, this is now being broken out as ISSUE-745. PAolo will reply with details on this shortly. > > RJ > > --- > RJ Auburn > CTO, Voxeo Corporation > tel:+1-407-418-1800 > > > On Jul 29, 2010, at 10:54 AM, RJ Auburn wrote: > >> To confirm this is being tracked as ISSUE-692 >> >> On Jul 26, 2010, at 7:50 AM, Petr Kuba wrote: >> >>> Hello www-voice, >>> >>> In 10_5_7, script 10_5_7_A_962.ccxml, assertion 962, the following code is used: >>> >>> <join id1="session.values.sessionOneConnID" >>> id2="general_connid"/> >>> >>> Since general_connid is incorrect<join> must fail. The test expects that error.conference.join should be sent in this case. >>> >>> In this case we are not sure whether error.conference.join or error.semantic event should be thrown. >>> >>> For further discussion see our previous message: >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-voice/2010AprJun/0068.html >>> This was tracked as ISSUE-692 and we are still waiting for the resolution. >>> >>> Please clarify on this. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Petr >>> >>> -- >>> Petr Kuba, Project Manager >>> OptimSys, s.r.o >>> kuba@optimsys.cz >>> Tel: +420 541 143 065 >>> Fax: +420 541 143 066 >>> http://www.optimsys.cz
Received on Monday, 30 August 2010 13:54:15 UTC