IRC log of htmlspeech on 2011-04-28

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:51:23 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #htmlspeech
15:51:23 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:51:32 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #htmlspeech
15:51:39 [burn]
trackbot, start telcon
15:51:41 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
15:51:43 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be
15:51:43 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
15:51:44 [trackbot]
Meeting: HTML Speech Incubator Group Teleconference
15:51:44 [trackbot]
Date: 28 April 2011
15:51:45 [burn]
zakim, this will be htmlspeech
15:51:45 [Zakim]
ok, burn; I see INC_(HTMLSPEECH)12:00PM scheduled to start in 9 minutes
15:51:58 [Zakim]
INC_(HTMLSPEECH)12:00PM has now started
15:52:00 [Zakim]
15:52:01 [burn]
Chair: Dan Burnett
15:52:15 [burn]
15:53:19 [burn]
zakim, code?
15:53:19 [Zakim]
the conference code is 48657 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.203.318.0479), burn
15:53:35 [Zakim]
15:53:49 [burn]
zakim, [Voxeo] is Dan_Burnett
15:53:49 [Zakim]
+Dan_Burnett; got it
15:53:55 [burn]
zakim, I am Dan_Burnett
15:53:55 [Zakim]
ok, burn, I now associate you with Dan_Burnett
15:57:26 [Zakim]
15:57:26 [Zakim]
15:57:26 [Zakim]
15:57:46 [smaug_]
Zakim, ??P31 is Olli_Pettay
15:57:46 [Zakim]
+Olli_Pettay; got it
15:57:51 [Zakim]
15:58:05 [burn]
zakim, [Microsoft] is Robert_Brown
15:58:05 [Zakim]
+Robert_Brown; got it
15:58:15 [smaug_]
Zakim, nick smaug_ is Olli_Pettay
15:58:15 [Zakim]
ok, smaug_, I now associate you with Olli_Pettay
15:58:29 [Robert]
Robert has joined #htmlspeech
15:58:36 [burn]
zakim, nick Robert is Robert_Brown
15:58:36 [Zakim]
ok, burn, I now associate Robert with Robert_Brown
15:59:41 [Zakim]
15:59:41 [ddahl]
ddahl has joined #htmlspeech
15:59:45 [Zakim]
15:59:57 [Zakim]
+ +1.760.705.aaaa - is perhaps AZ
16:00:22 [Zakim]
16:00:29 [burn]
zakim, aaaa is Bjorn_Bringert
16:00:29 [Zakim]
sorry, burn, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'
16:00:40 [Milan]
Milan has joined #htmlspeech
16:00:40 [burn]
zakim, nick ddahl is Debbie_Dahl
16:00:40 [Zakim]
ok, burn, I now associate ddahl with Debbie_Dahl
16:00:54 [burn]
Scribe: Robert Brown
16:01:01 [burn]
ScribeNick: Robert
16:01:13 [Charles_Hemphill]
Charles_Hemphill has joined #htmlspeech
16:03:20 [burn]
16:03:46 [Robert]
topic: F2F logistics
16:04:02 [Robert]
Bjorn: nothing new logistically
16:04:12 [Robert]
Burn: will send revised schedule
16:04:25 [Robert]
topic: updated report draft
16:04:58 [Raj]
Raj has joined #htmlspeech
16:05:04 [burn]
final report draft:
16:05:40 [Robert]
burn: no new comments
16:05:49 [bringert]
zakim, +1.760.705.aaaa is Bjorn_Bringert
16:05:54 [Robert]
topic: new design decisions
16:06:17 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #htmlspeech
16:06:25 [bringert]
zakim, +1.760.705.aaaa is Bjorn_Bringert
16:06:25 [Zakim]
sorry, bringert, I do not recognize a party named '+1.760.705.aaaa'
16:06:52 [burn]
zakim, who's on the phone?
16:06:53 [Zakim]
sorry, burn, I don't know what conference this is
16:06:54 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Raj, Charles_Hemphill, Milan, ddahl, Robert, RRSAgent, burn, bringert, smaug_, trackbot
16:07:40 [burn]
zakim, this is htmlspeech
16:07:40 [Zakim]
ok, burn; that matches INC_(HTMLSPEECH)12:00PM
16:07:59 [burn]
zakim, who's on the phone?
16:07:59 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Michae, Dan_Burnett, Olli_Pettay, Robert_Brown, Charles_Hemphill, Milan_Young, AZ, Debbie_Dahl, +1.818.237.aaaa
16:08:13 [burn]
zakim, AZ is now Bjorn_Bringert
16:08:13 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'AZ is now Bjorn_Bringert', burn
16:08:59 [burn]
zakim, AZ is Bjorn_Bringert
16:08:59 [Zakim]
+Bjorn_Bringert; got it
16:09:27 [Zakim]
16:09:42 [Robert]
Bjorn: previously only looked at intersection of proposals, is there anything that's in two proposals but not the third. e.g. continuous recognition
16:10:09 [Zakim]
16:10:52 [burn]
zakim, [IPCaller] is Raj_Tumuluri
16:10:52 [Zakim]
+Raj_Tumuluri; got it
16:10:55 [Robert]
Milan: any requirement that we support this?
16:11:01 [burn]
Regrets: Dan Druta
16:11:16 [burn]
zakim, aaaa is Patrick_Ehlen
16:11:16 [Zakim]
+Patrick_Ehlen; got it
16:11:37 [burn]
zakim, who's on the phone?
16:11:37 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Michae, Dan_Burnett, Olli_Pettay, Robert_Brown, Charles_Hemphill, Milan_Young, Bjorn_Bringert, Debbie_Dahl, Patrick_Ehlen, Michael_Johnston, Raj_Tumuluri
16:11:51 [burn]
zakim, Michae is Michael_Bodell
16:11:51 [Zakim]
+Michael_Bodell; got it
16:12:28 [Michael_]
Michael_ has joined #htmlspeech
16:12:35 [Robert]
burn: will add continuous recognition to the list of topics to discuss
16:13:33 [burn]
zakim, who's noisy?
16:13:33 [Zakim]
I am sorry, burn; I don't have the necessary resources to track talkers right now
16:13:40 [Robert]
Bjorn: only removed it from Google proposal because difficult to do , and may want to do it in a later version
16:14:51 [Robert]
Michael: recapped two scenarios stated by Bjorn: 1) continuous speech; 2) open mic
16:15:56 [Robert]
Bjorn: proposed that we all agree this is a requirement
16:16:32 [Robert]
Milan: we were vague about what the interim events requirement meant, whether it included results
16:17:18 [bringert]
burn: satish is trying to join, but zakim says the conference code isn't valid
16:17:31 [Robert]
Burn: [after discussion] proposes Michael adds this as a new requirement (or requirements) to the report
16:17:32 [burn]
zakim, code?
16:17:32 [Zakim]
the conference code is 48657 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.203.318.0479), burn
16:17:56 [Robert]
Michael: sure, but will also check to see whether we just need to clarify an existing requirement
16:18:17 [satish]
satish has joined #htmlspeech
16:18:41 [Robert]
Bjorn: this is also a design topic
16:20:01 [ehlen]
ehlen has joined #htmlspeech
16:20:12 [satish]
burn: will do
16:20:48 [Robert]
Bjorn: Robert is there anything else in the Microsoft proposal that should be considered as a design decision?
16:21:00 [Robert]
Robert: nothing apparent, will review again in coming week
16:21:22 [Robert]
Bjorn: should we start work on a joint proposal then?
16:22:03 [Robert]
Burn: proposes that we now go to the list of issues to discuss and discuss them
16:22:50 [Robert]
Bjorn: more items for discussion from Microsoft proposal
16:22:55 [burn]
zakim, bringert is Bjorn_Bringert
16:22:55 [Zakim]
sorry, burn, I do not recognize a party named 'bringert'
16:23:08 [burn]
zakim, nick bringert is Bjorn_Bringert
16:23:08 [Zakim]
ok, burn, I now associate bringert with Bjorn_Bringert
16:23:21 [burn]
zakim, nick burn is Daniel_Burnett
16:23:21 [Zakim]
sorry, burn, I do not see a party named 'Daniel_Burnett'
16:23:33 [burn]
zakim, nick Charles_Hemphill is Charles_Hemphill
16:23:33 [Zakim]
ok, burn, I now associate Charles_Hemphill with Charles_Hemphill
16:23:41 [Robert]
... MS proposal supports multiple grammars, but Google & Mozilla only supports one
16:23:47 [burn]
zakim, nick ddahl is Debbie_Dahl
16:23:47 [Zakim]
ok, burn, I now associate ddahl with Debbie_Dahl
16:24:04 [burn]
zakim, nick ehlen is Patrick_Ehlen
16:24:04 [Zakim]
ok, burn, I now associate ehlen with Patrick_Ehlen
16:24:05 [Robert]
Olli: Mozilla proposal allows multiple parallel recognitions, each with its own grammar
16:24:32 [burn]
zakim, nick Charles_Hemphill is Charles_Hemphill
16:24:32 [Zakim]
ok, burn, I now associate Charles_Hemphill with Charles_Hemphill
16:25:07 [Robert]
MichaelJohnston: can't reference an SLM from SRGS, so multiple grammars are required
16:25:27 [Robert]
Bjorn: proposes topic: Should we support multiple simultaneous grammars?
16:25:32 [burn]
zakim, nick Milan is Milan_Young
16:25:32 [Zakim]
ok, burn, I now associate Milan with Milan_Young
16:25:40 [burn]
zakim, nick Raj is Raj_Tumuluri
16:25:40 [Zakim]
ok, burn, I now associate Raj with Raj_Tumuluri
16:25:47 [Robert]
... proposes topic: which timeout parameters should we have?
16:25:48 [burn]
zakim, nick Robert is Robert_Brown
16:25:49 [Zakim]
ok, burn, I now associate Robert with Robert_Brown
16:26:05 [burn]
zakim, nick smaug_ is Olli_Pettay
16:26:07 [Zakim]
ok, burn, I now associate smaug_ with Olli_Pettay
16:26:10 [smaug_]
yeah, Mozilla proposal should have some timouts
16:26:13 [smaug_]
16:26:49 [Robert]
Bjorn: emulating speech input is a requirement, but it's only present in the Microsoft proposal
16:27:48 [Robert]
Michael: proposes topic: some way for the application to provide feedback information to the recognizer
16:29:07 [Robert]
Bjorn: does anybody disagree that this is a requirement we agree on?
16:29:43 [Robert]
Burn: proposes requirement: "it must be possible for the application author to provide feedback on the recognition result"
16:30:27 [Robert]
Debbie: need to discuss the result format
16:31:42 [Robert]
Michael: seems like general agreement on EMMA, with notion of other formats available
16:32:07 [Robert]
Olli: EMMA as a DOM document? Or as a JSON object?
16:32:30 [Robert]
MichaelJohnston: multimodal working group has been discussing JSON representations of EMMA
16:32:53 [Robert]
... there are some issues, such as losing element/attribute distinction
16:33:24 [Robert]
... straight translation to JSON is a little ugly
16:33:56 [Robert]
Michael: existing proposals include simple representations as alternatives to EMMA
16:34:48 [Robert]
MichaelJohnston: For more nuanced things, let's not reinvent solutions to the problems EMMA already solves
16:35:31 [Robert]
Milan: would rather not have EMMA mean XML, since that implies the app needs a parser
16:35:58 [Robert]
Debbie: sounds like we agree on EMMA, but need to discuss how its represented, simplified formats, etc
16:37:09 [Robert]
Milan: a good idea to agree that an EMMA result available through a DOM object is a baseline agreement
16:37:52 [Robert]
Bjorn: it's okay to provide the EMMA DOM, but we should also have the simple access mechanism that all three proposals have
16:38:08 [Robert]
Burn: would rather have XML or JSON, but not the DOM
16:38:22 [Robert]
Michael: if you have XML, you can feed it into the DOM
16:39:30 [Robert]
Burn: it's a minor objection, if everybody else agrees on the DOM, I'm okay with that
16:39:40 [Robert]
Bjorn: maybe just provide both
16:40:40 [Robert]
MichaelJohnston: EMMA will also help with more sophisticated multimodal apps, for example using ink. The DOM will be more convenient to work with.
16:41:17 [Robert]
Burn: proposed agreement: "both DOM and XML text representations of EMMA must be provided"
16:41:25 [Robert]
... haven't necessarily agreed that that is all
16:43:17 [Robert]
Bjorn: we already appear to agree, based on proposals: "recognition results must also be available in the javascript objects where the result is a list of recognition result items containing utterance, confidence and interpretation."
16:43:54 [Robert]
Michael: may need to be tweaked to accommodate continuous recognition
16:44:40 [Robert]
Burn: add "at least" to Bjorn's proposed requirement
16:45:24 [Robert]
Burn: added a statement "note that this will need to be adjusted based on any decision regarding support for continuous recognition"
16:45:59 [Robert]
Milan: would like to add a discussion topic around generic parameters to the recognition engine
16:47:19 [Robert]
Burn: related to existing topic on the list, but will add
16:47:46 [Robert]
Milan: also need to agree on standard parameters, such as speed-vs-accuracy
16:48:07 [Robert]
Burn: will generalize the timeouts discussion to include other parameters
16:49:18 [Robert]
MichaelJohnston: which parameters should be expressed in the javascript API, and what can go in the URI? What sorts of conflicts could occur?
16:49:55 [Robert]
Bjorn: URI parameters are engine specific
16:50:44 [Robert]
MichaelJohnston: for example, if we agreed that the way standard parameters are communicated is via the URI, they could come from the URI, or from the Javascript
16:51:35 [Robert]
Michael: need to discuss the API/protocol to the speech engine, and how standard parameters are conveyed
16:52:23 [Robert]
Bjorn: we need to discuss the protocol, it's not in the list
16:53:11 [Robert]
Burn: will add it to the list
16:54:11 [Robert]
Milan: are the grammars referred to by HTTP URI?
16:54:56 [Robert]
Burn: existing requirement says "uri" which was intended to represent URLs and URNs
16:55:16 [Robert]
Milan: would like to mandate that HTTP was for sure supported. there are lots of others that may work.
16:56:26 [Robert]
Robert: should we have a standard set of built-in grammars/topics?
16:56:49 [Robert]
Bjorn: in the Google proposal we had "builtin:" URIs
16:58:03 [Robert]
Burn: "a standard set of common tasks/grammars should be supported. details TBD"
16:58:24 [Robert]
Burn: need a discussion topic about what these are
16:59:11 [Robert]
Robert: what about inline grammars?
16:59:36 [Robert]
Bjorn: data URIs would work for that, and perhaps we should agree about that
16:59:48 [Robert]
Charles: would like to see inline grammars remain on the table
17:00:36 [Robert]
Burn: will add a discussion about inline grammars
17:01:39 [Robert]
Burn: we all agree on the functionality that inline grammars would give
17:02:02 [Robert]
MichaelJohnston: one target user is "mom & pop developers" who would provide simple grammars
17:03:00 [Robert]
Burn: discussion topic: "what is the mechanism for authors to directly include grammars within their HTML document? Is this inline XML, data URI or something else?"
17:03:07 [Zakim]
17:04:01 [Robert]
Robert: use case: given that HTML5 supports local storage, the data from which a grammar is constructed may only be located on the local device
17:04:45 [Robert]
Bjorn: proposes that we mandate data URIs, just for consistency with the rest of HTML
17:05:02 [Robert]
Burn: no objections, so will record as an agreement
17:05:50 [Robert]
Michael: need to discuss the ability to do re-recognition
17:06:00 [Robert]
Burn: related to the topic of recognition from a file
17:06:13 [Robert]
Bjorn: both are fine discussion topics
17:08:08 [Robert]
Burn: [discussion about whether there's anything to discuss around endpointing], already implied in existing discussion topic
17:08:40 [Robert]
Bjorn: context block?
17:09:24 [Robert]
Burn: discussion topic: "do we need a recognition context block capability?" and if we end up deciding yes, we'll discuss the mechanism
17:09:40 [Robert]
Milan: how do we specify a default recognizer?
17:09:47 [Robert]
Bjorn: don't specify it at all
17:10:25 [Robert]
... since it's the default
17:11:13 [Robert]
Michael: need some canonical string to specify user agent default, so we could switch back to it (could be empty string)
17:12:08 [Robert]
... Whereas how we specify a local one may be similar to the way to specify the remote engine
17:12:39 [Robert]
Bjorn: for local engines do we need to specify the engine or the criteria?
17:12:49 [Robert]
Burn: SSML does it this way
17:13:09 [Robert]
Bjorn: is there a use case for specifying criteria?
17:14:01 [Robert]
Burn: in Tropo API, language specification can specify a specific engine
17:16:03 [Robert]
Burn: this is a scoping issue. e.g. in SSML a voice is used in the scope of the enclosing element
17:16:30 [Robert]
... in HTML could say that the scope is the input field, or the entire form
17:17:04 [Robert]
Bjorn: in all the proposals, scoping is to a javascript object
17:18:22 [Robert]
Bjorn: are there any other criteria for local recognizers than speed-vs-accuracy?
17:19:22 [Robert]
Charles: different microphones will have different profiles
17:20:01 [Robert]
Raj: how do we discover characteristics of installed engines
17:20:54 [Robert]
Michael: selection = discovery?
17:21:08 [Robert]
Burn: in SSML, some people wanted discovery
17:21:24 [Robert]
Bjorn: use cases?
17:21:47 [Robert]
Michael: selection of existing acoustic and language models
17:22:29 [Robert]
Robert: there's a blurry line between what a recognizer is, and what a parameter is
17:23:26 [Robert]
Michael: topic: "how to specify default recognition"
17:23:38 [Robert]
Michael: topic: "how to specify local recognizers"
17:24:01 [Robert]
Michael: topic: "do we need to specify engines by capability?"
17:25:26 [Robert]
Raj: or "how do we specify the parameters to the local recognizer?"
17:26:08 [Robert]
Burn: want to back up to "what is a recognizer, and what parameters does it need?"
17:26:56 [Robert]
... call something a recognizer, and call other things related to that a recognizer
17:27:43 [Robert]
Bjorn: the API probably doesn't need to specify a recognizer. speech and parameters go somewhere and results come back
17:29:35 [Robert]
Burn: what is the boundary between selecting a recognizer and selecting the parameters of a recognizer
17:30:04 [Robert]
Milan: we need to discuss audio streaming
17:30:22 [Robert]
Burn: topic: "do we support audio streaming and how?"
17:30:30 [Milan]
Milan: Let's discuss audio streaming
17:30:52 [Zakim]
17:30:53 [Zakim]
17:30:53 [Zakim]
17:30:54 [Zakim]
17:31:02 [Zakim]
17:31:03 [Zakim]
17:31:03 [Zakim]
17:31:08 [Zakim]
17:31:13 [burn]
zakim, who's on the phone?
17:31:13 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Dan_Burnett, Robert_Brown
17:31:14 [Zakim]
17:31:21 [Zakim]
17:31:22 [Zakim]
INC_(HTMLSPEECH)12:00PM has ended
17:31:24 [Zakim]
Attendees were Dan_Burnett, Olli_Pettay, Robert_Brown, Charles_Hemphill, Milan_Young, Debbie_Dahl, +1.818.237.aaaa, Bjorn_Bringert, Michael_Johnston, Raj_Tumuluri, Patrick_Ehlen,
17:31:26 [Zakim]
... Michael_Bodell
17:31:34 [burn]
rrsagent, draft minutes
17:31:34 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate burn
17:31:39 [burn]
rrsagent, make minutes public
17:31:39 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', burn. Try /msg RRSAgent help
17:31:48 [burn]
rrsagent, make log public
18:45:26 [ddahl]
ddahl has left #htmlspeech
19:34:55 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #htmlspeech