W3C WBS Home

Results of Questionnaire Questionnaire on Multimodal Web Application Authoring

The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody. In addition, answers are sent to the following email addresses: ashimura@w3.org,dahl@conversational-technologies.com,jim@larson-tech.com

This questionnaire was open from 2007-05-06 to 2007-06-30.

18 answers have been received.

Jump to results for question:

  1. What are the client devices for multimodal applications?
  2. Modalities
  3. Combinataion of modalities
  4. Location
  5. Data format
  6. Language
  7. XML based or not
  8. Use cases
  9. Reusability
  10. General comments

1. What are the client devices for multimodal applications?

To what client device(s) should we target multimodal application specification languages?

Please rank your priorities. Note that 5 represents your highest priority and 1 your lowest priority.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
123456
Desktop PC's 4 2 1 1 7 2
Laptops 3 1 2 4 5 2
Cell phones 1 3 12 1
Home appliances: environment (thermostat, lights, etc.) 2 2 5 5 2 1
Home appliances: entertainment (TV, radio,video recorder, gaming devices, etc.) 1 1 7 7 1
Home appliances: food management(microwave, refrigerator, coffeepot, etc.) 5 6 2 1 3
Home appliances: security (outside lights, locks, etc.) 2 1 4 4 3 3
Home appliances: communication (telephone, chat, etc.) 1 5 2 8 1
Kiosks 3 2 1 5 2 4
Automobiles 1 5 2 8 1
Others (Please specify below) 1 1 1 14

Averages:

Choices All responders:
Value
Desktop PC's3.65
Laptops3.76
Cell phones4.76
Home appliances: environment (thermostat, lights, etc.)3.35
Home appliances: entertainment (TV, radio,video recorder, gaming devices, etc.) 4.35
Home appliances: food management(microwave, refrigerator, coffeepot, etc.) 3.18
Home appliances: security (outside lights, locks, etc.) 3.82
Home appliances: communication (telephone, chat, etc.) 4.12
Kiosks 3.76
Automobiles4.18
Others (Please specify below)5.65

Details

Responder Desktop PC'sLaptopsCell phonesHome appliances: environment (thermostat, lights, etc.)Home appliances: entertainment (TV, radio,video recorder, gaming devices, etc.) Home appliances: food management(microwave, refrigerator, coffeepot, etc.) Home appliances: security (outside lights, locks, etc.) Home appliances: communication (telephone, chat, etc.) Kiosks AutomobilesOthers (Please specify below)Comments
Lawrence Catchpole 5 5 5 2 3 4 2 5 5 3 6
Patrick Nepper 5 5 5 1 2 1 1 3 4 3 6
hiromi honda
Nicholas Jones 3 4 5 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 The falling cost of simple computing combined with wireless networking means that it's likely there will be a very wide range of future devices that don't fit into today's neat categories such as "cellphone" or "home entertainment device". Furthermore, I expect that in the longer term future user interfaces will become disassociated from individual devcies, with multiple devices participating in a user experience. E.g. use cases like "follow me" video calls which switch between the mobile phone and the TV as I move around the house. Therefore specifications should be as open as possible to new devices and new multi-device interaction paradigms.
KATERINA PASTRA 5 5 3 4 5 3 3 5 5 5 6
Simon Harper 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 This seems to be the wrong way of looking at things to me. I think that by asking these questions you pre-judge a use case / scenario. This kind of decision - by developers - is exactly the kind of thing that has created problems in the Disability community from the outset. Is MM interaction important? I f the answer is yes when we should make sure all devices can handle this at a rating of 5.
Jose ROUILLARD 5 4 5 3 4 3 3 3 1 2 3 Healthcare (patient augmented room, smart night table ...)
Kostas Karpouzis 5 1 4 1 5 1 4 5 4 4 6
Alex Pfalzgraf 1 2 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 6
Norbert Reithinger 1 3 5 4 5 3 4 4 1 5 6 Multimodal interaction will be most beeficial outside the traditional desktop: i.e. while on the go (mobile phone, car), when controlling remote devices (home appliances). The WII success of multimodal interaction (compared to the technically superior but traditional PS3) shows that also gaming is pretty interesting for MMI.
Jan Alexanderson 6 6 4 5 5 6 5 5 6 5 6
Quan Nguyen 5 5 5 4 4 1 4 1 1 5 6
Ali Choumane 2 4 5 3 4 6 6 5 6 5 6
Garland Phillips 1 1 5 3 4 3 6 3 4 3 6
Hirotaka Ueda 4 4 5 4 5 3 3 5 2 3 6
Massimo Romanelli 1 1 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 5 6
Daniel Sonntag 2 3 5 2 4 1 1 3 2 4 6
Yoshitaka Tokusho 5 5 5 3 5 1 5 5 4 5 6

2. Modalities

What input and output methods should be standardized?

Please rank your priorities. Note that 5 represents your highest priority and 1 your lowest priority.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
123456
Graphical display 2 4 10 1
Simple DTMF phone keypad 2 2 3 6 4
Blackberry-style keypad 1 6 4 1 1 4
Computer keyboard 3 2 4 6 2
Pointing device (mouse, joystick, touch screen, etc.) 1 2 3 10 1
Automatic Speech Recognition 1 1 3 11 1
Text to Speech Synthesis 2 4 10 1
Audio capture and replay 1 4 2 5 5
still and video image capture and their interpretation (e.g. bar codes, QR codes, etc.) 2 5 2 6 2
Ink capture and handwriting recognition 2 4 3 7 1
Sensor input (GPS, temperature, wind velocity, etc.) 2 3 2 5 3 2
Biometrics (please give examples below) 2 3 1 1 3 7
Haptics (wii-style interface, etc.) 2 1 1 10 3
Others (please specify below) 1 2 14

Averages:

Choices All responders:
Value
Graphical display4.59
Simple DTMF phone keypad4.06
Blackberry-style keypad3.41
Computer keyboard3.59
Pointing device (mouse, joystick, touch screen, etc.)4.41
Automatic Speech Recognition4.59
Text to Speech Synthesis 4.47
Audio capture and replay 4.53
still and video image capture and their interpretation (e.g. bar codes, QR codes, etc.)4.06
Ink capture and handwriting recognition 3.94
Sensor input (GPS, temperature, wind velocity, etc.) 3.59
Biometrics (please give examples below) 4.24
Haptics (wii-style interface, etc.)4.65
Others (please specify below)5.76

Details

Responder Graphical displaySimple DTMF phone keypadBlackberry-style keypadComputer keyboardPointing device (mouse, joystick, touch screen, etc.)Automatic Speech RecognitionText to Speech Synthesis Audio capture and replay still and video image capture and their interpretation (e.g. bar codes, QR codes, etc.)Ink capture and handwriting recognition Sensor input (GPS, temperature, wind velocity, etc.) Biometrics (please give examples below) Haptics (wii-style interface, etc.)Others (please specify below)Comments
Lawrence Catchpole 5 5 3 5 5 5 5 3 5 5 2 2 6 6
Patrick Nepper 5 5 2 3 3 5 5 5 2 4 4 6 5 6
hiromi honda
Nicholas Jones 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Biometrics might include both current and new technologies such as EMG, expression recognition. Referring to my earlier comment, the user interface may (must) be able to integrate multiple clues to the user's intention. E.g. if an accelerometer on a phone suggests I'm running, a GPS shows I'm in an airport then I'm probably running to catch a plane. This implies the use of certain UI modalities, e.g. voice interactions only. The questionnaire suggests some implicit assumptions which might not be correct during the next decade. E.g. that the UI is always intentional - the user specifies exactly what he/she wants to do. Whereas UIs will likely become more deductional, assembling clues from multiple sensors. Also, referring to my earlier comment, there is no reason for a UI to be bound to a single interaction model for the duration of an interaction.
KATERINA PASTRA 5 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6
Simon Harper 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 I think there should not be a standard input and output method, but a standard method FOR input output which can be used for all of the technologies above. It may be more difficult to implement now, but it will pay off in the future.
Jose ROUILLARD 5 5 6 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 4 3 3 6
Kostas Karpouzis 4 5 1 5 5 5 4 3 3 1 1 1 2 6
Alex Pfalzgraf 4 3 4 1 5 5 5 6 5 4 4 6 5 6
Norbert Reithinger 3 1 2 1 5 3 2 4 2 4 3 1 5 6
Jan Alexanderson 4 3 3 3 5 5 5 6 6 3 4 6 5 6
Quan Nguyen 5 6 6 5 5 4 4 4 5 5 3 6 5 6
Ali Choumane 5 6 6 1 1 5 5 6 3 5 6 6 6 4 gaze as input
Garland Phillips 4 2 2 2 3 5 5 3 3 3 2 2 2 6
Hirotaka Ueda 5 5 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 6
Massimo Romanelli 5 6 2 6 5 2 2 6 4 1 1 6 5 6
Daniel Sonntag 3 2 2 2 4 4 4 2 3 3 2 2 5 6
Yoshitaka Tokusho 5 1 2 3 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6

3. Combinataion of modalities

Which combinations of the above modalities are you interested in?

Please rank your priorities. Note that 5 represents your highest priority and 1 your lowest priority.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
123456
voice dialog components (Speech recognition, Speech synthesis) 6 10 1
Lip-reading (audio-visual speech recognition) 3 3 6 1 2 2
GPS and voice (location-based services) 1 5 2 5 3 1
other combinations (please specify below) 1 9 7

Averages:

Choices All responders:
Value
voice dialog components (Speech recognition, Speech synthesis)4.71
Lip-reading (audio-visual speech recognition) 3.12
GPS and voice (location-based services)3.41
other combinations (please specify below)5.29

Details

Responder voice dialog components (Speech recognition, Speech synthesis)Lip-reading (audio-visual speech recognition) GPS and voice (location-based services)other combinations (please specify below)Comments
Lawrence Catchpole 5 3 3 6
Patrick Nepper 5 3 4 5 GUI+Voice+Haptics realized e.g. by XHTML+Voice plus NFC integration
hiromi honda
Nicholas Jones 5 2 5 5 Combinations of any and all input technologies may be used going beyond those suggested here. E.g. combining eye tracking and voice recognition so when I say "stop" we can deduce that I'm probably instructing the device I'm looking towards. Another issue to be addressed is what happens when there are multiple devices / applications monitoring the same source of user input. E.g. watching my expression or listening to my voice. How do we disambiguate which input is routed to which system?
KATERINA PASTRA 4 3 4 6
Simon Harper 6 6 6 5 Non Conventional forms such as sign language etc
Jose ROUILLARD 5 3 4 3 Gesture + voice (Bolt like, SVG ?).
Kostas Karpouzis 4 5 1 6
Alex Pfalzgraf 5 2 5 5 Grahpics + Speech (ASR/TTS) + Pointing Devices/Haptics + Sensor Input
Norbert Reithinger 4 1 3 5 Most interesting will be haptic devices (e.g. accelerometers in smartphones) and the semantics and interpretation of the signals. Voice is mature and will eb successrul in the current boundaries unless the recognition quality gets better in real life environments.
Jan Alexanderson 5 3 4 5 Input: speech and (hand or pen) gestures
Output: speech, graphics, other sounds, vibrations etc.
Quan Nguyen 5 3 2 6
Ali Choumane 4 4 4 5 (Speech recognition, handwriting recognition, Speech synthesis, Visuel)
Garland Phillips 5 1 2 6
Hirotaka Ueda 4 2 2 6
Massimo Romanelli 5 6 2 5 The interplay of speech, gesture and haptic is a basic requirement for spontaneous and successful human interection with devices of any kind depending on scenario and content (multimedia manipulation, menus navigation).
Daniel Sonntag 4 1 2 5 Haptics on device/touchscreen and speech
Yoshitaka Tokusho 5 5 5 6

4. Location

Where do things run?

Please rank your priorities. Note that 5 represents your highest priority and 1 your lowest priority.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
123456
On the client 3 2 1 2 7 2
On the server 4 2 4 2 3 2
On the client and also on the server (e.g. a simple ASR on the client and a powerful ASR on the server so that the device can function in a limited mode when not connected) 2 4 6 4 1
Distributed between client and server (e.g. extract speech features on the client, send to the server where powerful ASR does the rest) 2 2 4 6 3
Others (please specify below) 1 16

Averages:

Choices All responders:
Value
On the client3.82
On the server3.24
On the client and also on the server (e.g. a simple ASR on the client and a powerful ASR on the server so that the device can function in a limited mode when not connected)3.76
Distributed between client and server (e.g. extract speech features on the client, send to the server where powerful ASR does the rest) 4.12
Others (please specify below)5.94

Details

Responder On the clientOn the serverOn the client and also on the server (e.g. a simple ASR on the client and a powerful ASR on the server so that the device can function in a limited mode when not connected)Distributed between client and server (e.g. extract speech features on the client, send to the server where powerful ASR does the rest) Others (please specify below)Comments
Lawrence Catchpole 5 2 3 4 6
Patrick Nepper 5 1 1 1 6
hiromi honda
Nicholas Jones 5 5 5 5 5 Given the huge variation of computing capability from the simplest clients (such as a sensor node with a single pixel display) and the most complex (e.g. a PC) no assumptions can be made about UI distribution. Also, why can't we have the UI operating in a peer to peer mode distributed across multiple clients? This fits the model I mentioned earlier where many devices may co-operate in an interaction.
KATERINA PASTRA 1 5 5 5 6
Simon Harper 5 1 1 1 6
Jose ROUILLARD 6 6 6 6 6
Kostas Karpouzis 4 2 4 6 6
Alex Pfalzgraf 2 5 4 5 6
Norbert Reithinger 5 1 3 2 6 As the mobile client changes frequently (c.f. the model changes for smartphones), client-side solutions must be reusable and adhere to standards not tied to a specific vendor.
Jan Alexanderson 6 6 4 4 6
Quan Nguyen 5 3 3 6 6
Ali Choumane 1 1 3 5 6
Garland Phillips 5 3 5 4 6
Hirotaka Ueda 3 3 4 4 6
Massimo Romanelli 2 4 4 5 6
Daniel Sonntag 1 3 4 2 6 I think on this abstract level this is more a questions of belief rather than a more concrete consideration.
Yoshitaka Tokusho 4 4 5 5 6

5. Data format

What formats should be used to exchange data among processors?

Please rank your priorities. Note that 5 represents your highest priority and 1 your lowest priority.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
123456
Flat file 4 3 3 1 2 4
ECMAScript/JavaScript 8 3 2 1 3
XML 1 1 4 9 2
EMMA 1 1 7 4 4
Others (please specify below) 1 16

Averages:

Choices All responders:
Value
Flat file3.35
ECMAScript/JavaScript2.47
XML4.59
EMMA4.53
Others (please specify below)5.94

Details

Responder Flat fileECMAScript/JavaScriptXMLEMMAOthers (please specify below)Comments
Lawrence Catchpole 3 3 5 2 6
Patrick Nepper 6 6 6 6 6
hiromi honda
Nicholas Jones 5 2 5 4 5 This may depend on the granularity and timeliness of the information. E.g. some form of RPC might be best for real time interactions. Also it may depend on the capability of the participatint devices. E.g. sensor nodes probably don't want to parse XML.
KATERINA PASTRA 3 3 5 4 6
Simon Harper 5 1 5 6 6
Jose ROUILLARD 2 1 4 4 6
Kostas Karpouzis 2 1 4 5 6
Alex Pfalzgraf 1 1 5 5 6
Norbert Reithinger 1 1 2 5 6 Prestructured XML schemata like EMMA help a lot in interoperability. The script based solutions lack clarity.
Jan Alexanderson 1 1 3 4 6
Quan Nguyen 1 6 5 4 6
Ali Choumane 6 1 4 6 6
Garland Phillips 6 6 6 6 6
Hirotaka Ueda 2 2 5 3 6
Massimo Romanelli 6 1 5 5 6
Daniel Sonntag 3 2 4 4 6
Yoshitaka Tokusho 4 4 5 4 6

6. Language

What languages should be reused in multimodal applications to perform the following functions? Some possibilities are listed with each function.

Please rank your priorities. Note that 5 represents your highest priority and 1 your lowest priority.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
123456
Dialog management(SCXML, VoiceXML,CCXML, scripting, server-side programs) 2 1 4 9 1
Synchronization of modalities (SCXML, VoiceXML, CCXML, scripting, server-side programs) 2 1 5 6 3
Presentation (HTML/XHTML, SSML, SVG, SMIL, VoiceXML, SRGS, SISR, PLS) 1 3 4 8 1
Data extraction (XSLT, XPath, XLink, DOM) 2 7 4 2 2
user input representation (EMMA, InkML, ECMAScript objects, generic XML) 1 7 7 2
Access to modalities (a set of standardized APIs) 2 1 4 4 4 2
Others (please specify below) 17

Averages:

Choices All responders:
Value
Dialog management(SCXML, VoiceXML,CCXML, scripting, server-side programs)4.35
Synchronization of modalities (SCXML, VoiceXML, CCXML, scripting, server-side programs)4.41
Presentation (HTML/XHTML, SSML, SVG, SMIL, VoiceXML, SRGS, SISR, PLS) 4.29
Data extraction (XSLT, XPath, XLink, DOM) 3.71
user input representation (EMMA, InkML, ECMAScript objects, generic XML) 4.59
Access to modalities (a set of standardized APIs) 3.76
Others (please specify below)6.00

Details

Responder Dialog management(SCXML, VoiceXML,CCXML, scripting, server-side programs)Synchronization of modalities (SCXML, VoiceXML, CCXML, scripting, server-side programs)Presentation (HTML/XHTML, SSML, SVG, SMIL, VoiceXML, SRGS, SISR, PLS) Data extraction (XSLT, XPath, XLink, DOM) user input representation (EMMA, InkML, ECMAScript objects, generic XML) Access to modalities (a set of standardized APIs) Others (please specify below)Comments
Lawrence Catchpole 5 5 5 4 5 6 6
Patrick Nepper 5 5 5 3 4 1 6 Please reconsider XHTML+Voice. I believe it was a very promising step forward!
hiromi honda
Nicholas Jones 5 4 5 3 5 5 6 I haven't thought about this in detail, but we prpobably have a variety of different roles which may need different languages. E.g. orchestrating a UI involving multiple devices may need some high level framework, and talking to a GPS needs a low level API.
KATERINA PASTRA 5 5 5 3 4 5 6
Simon Harper 4 6 5 4 6 5 6
Jose ROUILLARD 5 4 4 4 4 3 6
Kostas Karpouzis 4 5 5 3 5 3 6
Alex Pfalzgraf 5 5 4 5 5 4 6
Norbert Reithinger 5 5 3 3 5 3 6
Jan Alexanderson 2 2 2 2 4 4 6 Dialog management: Most of these things are too limited, e.g., VoiceXML, to be really useful for natural and intuitive applications. All these things mentioned lack a discourse memory which is vital to our applications.
Synchronization is relevant but not using VoiceXML (I don't understand that btw)
Data extraction is irrelevant.
Quan Nguyen 5 6 6 6 6 6 6
Ali Choumane 6 6 4 6 5 5 6
Garland Phillips 2 3 3 3 4 3 6
Hirotaka Ueda 4 4 5 3 4 4 6
Massimo Romanelli 5 4 3 5 5 1 6
Daniel Sonntag 3 2 5 2 3 2 6
Yoshitaka Tokusho 4 4 4 4 4 4 6

7. XML based or not

summary | by responder | by choice

For each of the functions above, which should be based on XML and which should be based on other approaches?

Please check the box if you think it should be XML based.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Dialog management 12
Presentation 13
Data extraction 9
User input representation 14
Access to modalities 11
Others (please specify below) 2

Skip to view by choice.

View by responder

Details

Responder XML based or notComments
Lawrence Catchpole
  • Dialog management
  • Data extraction
  • User input representation
  • Access to modalities
Patrick Nepper
  • Dialog management
  • Presentation
  • Data extraction
  • User input representation
  • Access to modalities
hiromi honda
Nicholas Jones
  • Dialog management
  • Presentation
  • Data extraction
  • User input representation
  • Access to modalities
  • Others (please specify below)
XML is fine, but IMHO can't be the only format. Many devices (like cellphones or dumb sensor nodes) won't be able to deal with XML easily.
KATERINA PASTRA
  • Dialog management
  • Data extraction
  • User input representation
Simon Harper
  • Dialog management
  • Presentation
  • Data extraction
  • User input representation
  • Access to modalities
Jose ROUILLARD
  • Dialog management
  • Presentation
  • Data extraction
  • User input representation
  • Access to modalities
Kostas Karpouzis
  • Dialog management
  • Presentation
  • User input representation
  • Access to modalities
Alex Pfalzgraf
  • Dialog management
  • Presentation
  • Data extraction
  • User input representation
Norbert Reithinger
  • Dialog management
  • Presentation
  • User input representation
  • Access to modalities
Jan Alexanderson
  • Others (please specify below)
XML or not is irrelevant. The only thing which is good with XML is schemata. Otherwise it is as good with Lisp Lists, prolog lists or any other well definable syntactic formalism.
Quan Nguyen
  • User input representation
  • Access to modalities
Ali Choumane
  • Presentation
  • User input representation
  • Access to modalities
Garland Phillips
  • Dialog management
  • Presentation
  • Data extraction
Hirotaka Ueda
  • Presentation
Massimo Romanelli
  • Dialog management
  • Presentation
  • User input representation
  • Access to modalities
Daniel Sonntag
  • Presentation
  • User input representation
Yoshitaka Tokusho
  • Dialog management
  • Presentation
  • Data extraction
  • User input representation
  • Access to modalities

View by choice

ChoiceResponders
Dialog management
  • Lawrence Catchpole
  • Patrick Nepper
  • Nicholas Jones
  • KATERINA PASTRA
  • Simon Harper
  • Jose ROUILLARD
  • Kostas Karpouzis
  • Alex Pfalzgraf
  • Norbert Reithinger
  • Garland Phillips
  • Massimo Romanelli
  • Yoshitaka Tokusho
Presentation
  • Patrick Nepper
  • Nicholas Jones
  • Simon Harper
  • Jose ROUILLARD
  • Kostas Karpouzis
  • Alex Pfalzgraf
  • Norbert Reithinger
  • Ali Choumane
  • Garland Phillips
  • Hirotaka Ueda
  • Massimo Romanelli
  • Daniel Sonntag
  • Yoshitaka Tokusho
Data extraction
  • Lawrence Catchpole
  • Patrick Nepper
  • Nicholas Jones
  • KATERINA PASTRA
  • Simon Harper
  • Jose ROUILLARD
  • Alex Pfalzgraf
  • Garland Phillips
  • Yoshitaka Tokusho
User input representation
  • Lawrence Catchpole
  • Patrick Nepper
  • Nicholas Jones
  • KATERINA PASTRA
  • Simon Harper
  • Jose ROUILLARD
  • Kostas Karpouzis
  • Alex Pfalzgraf
  • Norbert Reithinger
  • Quan Nguyen
  • Ali Choumane
  • Massimo Romanelli
  • Daniel Sonntag
  • Yoshitaka Tokusho
Access to modalities
  • Lawrence Catchpole
  • Patrick Nepper
  • Nicholas Jones
  • Simon Harper
  • Jose ROUILLARD
  • Kostas Karpouzis
  • Norbert Reithinger
  • Quan Nguyen
  • Ali Choumane
  • Massimo Romanelli
  • Yoshitaka Tokusho
Others (please specify below)
  • Nicholas Jones
  • Jan Alexanderson

8. Use cases

What use cases are important to you?

Details

Responder Use cases
Lawrence Catchpole
Patrick Nepper (Location-based) Mobile access to the web, accessibility for disabled people and the elderly.
hiromi honda
Nicholas Jones Everything?
KATERINA PASTRA Multimodal fusion for indexing, retrieval and summarization
Simon Harper Use cases are misleading IMO, because they pre-judge the user and are filtered through technologists. In real life the number if use cases are so extreme that designing with this in mind is the only real solution.
Jose ROUILLARD
Kostas Karpouzis
Alex Pfalzgraf Web-based services via Smartphone (esp. location-based services)
Combination of home appliance control with web-based services
Combination of car control with web-based services (Car2X) and sensoric input
Norbert Reithinger Use cases that will dominate the multimodal area will address mobile users that are not tied to a big screen or other stationary devices.
Jan Alexanderson
Quan Nguyen
Ali Choumane
Garland Phillips
Hirotaka Ueda Various devices around user coordinate with each other and provide various services according to the user-context.
Massimo Romanelli Interaction with smartphones, multimedia manipulation
Daniel Sonntag Different end devices run by same dialogue engine.
Yoshitaka Tokusho Personal Computing area is most important because we are spending most of working time in front of Personal Comupter and working on the Computer Display.

9. Reusability

If you already have a version of multimodal applications/solutions, how important is the ability to plug-in/reuse the modality components you have already developed?

Please rank your priorities. Note that 5 represents your highest priority and 1 your lowest priority.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
123456
ability to plug-in/reuse the modality components 1 1 2 9 4

Averages:

Choices All responders:
Value
ability to plug-in/reuse the modality components4.76

Details

Responder ability to plug-in/reuse the modality componentsComments
Lawrence Catchpole 5
Patrick Nepper 5 We have already created some prototypes using VoiceXML and XHTML+Voice, respectively. Besides some minor problems with X+V, we are satisfied with their simplicity and degree of abstraction (e.g. as opposed to EMMA).
hiromi honda
Nicholas Jones 6
KATERINA PASTRA 5
Simon Harper 1
Jose ROUILLARD 5
Kostas Karpouzis 5
Alex Pfalzgraf 4
Norbert Reithinger 5 I was involved in multiple multimodal project and the (partial) reusability is an absolute must. See also my remark above about model changes.
Jan Alexanderson 5
Quan Nguyen 5
Ali Choumane 4
Garland Phillips 6
Hirotaka Ueda 6
Massimo Romanelli 5
Daniel Sonntag 3
Yoshitaka Tokusho 6

10. General comments

Please feel free to add any comments, justifications, and additional responses that you feel are important.

Details

Responder General comments
Lawrence Catchpole
Patrick Nepper Again, I would like to see a revitalization of XHTML+Voice. Both, XHTML and VoiceXML have already proven their advantages for their respective modalities. Combining both to build a multimodal specification language seems very promising to me (as far as our prototype implementations are concerned).
hiromi honda
Nicholas Jones I think maybe there needs to be an explicit statement about how UI design is expected to evolve so we can discuss the target. I suspect we have at least 3 stages: (a) simple UI (like a GUI). (2) composite UI involving lots of input / output technologies. (3) environmental UI involving lots of separate devices in an intelligent environment.
KATERINA PASTRA
Simon Harper
Jose ROUILLARD
Kostas Karpouzis
Alex Pfalzgraf
Norbert Reithinger Excuse for any typos and glitches of a non-native speaker :-)
Jan Alexanderson
Quan Nguyen
Ali Choumane
Garland Phillips
Hirotaka Ueda
Massimo Romanelli
Daniel Sonntag I think the form is well-structured.
But more concrete scenarios should be regarded. I think different
integration environments and characteristics, e.g., time, effort, and skills, result naturally in different standardisation requirements.
Yoshitaka Tokusho

More details on responses


Compact view of the results / list of email addresses of the responders

WBS home / Questionnaires / WG questionnaires / Answer this questionnaire


Maintained by Laurent Carcone, from a development by Dominique Hazaël-Massieux (dom@w3.org) on an original design by Michael Sperberg-McQueen $Id: showv.php3,v 1.127 2015-02-04 08:52:34 carcone Exp $. Please send bug reports and request for enhancements to lcarcone@w3.org with w3t-sys@w3.org copied (if your mail client supports it, send mail directly to the right persons)