15:08:24 RRSAgent has joined #speech 15:08:24 logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/10/31-speech-irc 15:08:29 Zakim has joined #speech 15:09:39 Gottfried has joined #speech 15:11:04 Milan has joined #speech 15:11:08 burn has joined #speech 15:11:10 scribe: Milan 15:12:42 dbaron has joined #speech 15:12:54 dbaron has left #speech 15:13:19 Debbie: start with introductions 15:15:47 ,.. many attempts to integrate speech and HTML 15:16:00 ... many attempts to integrate speech and HTML 15:16:12 ... first was HTML Speech XG 15:16:48 Dan: Google initiated an W3C incubator group 15:17:00 ... started with use cases 15:17:12 ... completed almost a year ago 15:17:41 Debbie: It was unclear how to move that work forward 15:17:58 ... JavaScript speech API took that forward 15:18:19 ... but now we want to move that to an actual standard 15:18:55 Judy has joined #speech 15:19:27 ... we'd like to discuss how to move that forward 15:19:48 Gottfried: How does this relate to CCS3? 15:20:04 Olli: Unclear how widely that is implemented 15:20:26 Dan: No aware of any attempts to make that work consistent 15:20:52 Gottried: why? 15:21:09 Olli: Wanted simple apis 15:21:17 Dan: This is not styling 15:22:05 ... more focused on dialogs 15:22:14 ... than simple input/output 15:22:56 Debbie: XG only focused on JS apis 15:23:04 ... CG had no markup 15:23:23 http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/speech-api/raw-file/tip/speechapi.html 15:24:03 that was CG 15:24:08 XG report http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/htmlspeech/XGR-htmlspeech-20111206/ 15:24:18 Judy: Advanced notice has been sent 15:24:35 David_MacD_Lenovo has joined #speech 15:24:36 ... but need to complete the charter 15:25:16 ... lots of interest in the W3C in speech, but it's not clear 15:25:38 evanli has joined #speech 15:25:48 ... perhaps a map would help interested parties learn the direction 15:26:21 Dan: When trying to define the XG, the clearest statement was not making it VoiceXML 15:26:29 ... so yes, I agree 15:27:06 David: What are you trying to do with speech on the web? 15:27:17 Debbie: Many different goals 15:27:28 ... 1) Use speech on mobile devices 15:28:00 ... ie leverage multimodal environment 15:28:39 ... eg want to shop for "red sweaters" 15:28:59 ... and use voice to narrow down the list 15:29:09 ... put items on wish list 15:29:35 DanB: mobile device use cases are common 15:30:00 ... senarios range from simple input to have a conversation 15:30:40 ... services may be network or local 15:31:02 ... need to select different recognizers 15:31:50 ... EG user uses Chrome to go to MS Bing 15:32:08 ... MS has enhanced recognizer to use MS recognizer 15:32:38 ... without ability to select recognizer, this doesn't work 15:32:56 Jim: Also consider IVR applications ported to the web 15:33:35 Gottfried: Consider accesibility 15:33:49 ... eg API that outputs speech to a user 15:34:08 Jim: HTML author has ability to handle that 15:35:08 Dan: For styling, often want to speak something different than just state data 15:36:19 Gottfried: Need to solve these problems in a flexible way. Media type attributes 15:36:34 ... need fallbacks should authoring fail 15:36:54 Olli: we haven't focused on accesibility 15:37:10 ... need to make it as part of the requirements 15:37:37 Dan: CSS might be a better use case 15:38:14 ... if CSS is not sufficient, we might need to change focus of this effort 15:38:51 ... might need to get into semantic analysis 15:39:26 Olli: In the existing speech APIs, you can tightly control the output 15:40:49 Debbie: on speech input side, can't require someone always to speak 15:41:06 Judy: must always be multiple input and output options 15:41:08 ... not required 15:41:42 ... eg government agencies were forcing speech as the only option 15:42:07 Dan: VoiceXML tried to make this work on featureless phones 15:42:37 ... language provided capability to allow for key input 15:43:35 Judy: there are some regulatory requirements for multiple inputs 15:43:46 Debbie: good exercise to go through the use cases 15:44:08 ... and see if they are consistent with these goals 15:44:17 Dan: No speech case has already been handled 15:44:49 ... because this is an HTML environement 15:46:38 ... Mike C from Google wanted to have speech available everywhere 15:48:09 Milan: Google has driven the CG API and is a leading browser vendor. The question is whether the people in this room would be sufficient to create and drive an effective working group. 15:48:13 q+ 15:48:43 … charter said the work would be taken out of the CG and worked on in new WG, but Google has said they don't want it to move out of the CG. 15:49:10 … Ian said that something could be put on the CG spec saying that it was produced in CG but new work will be happening in WG. But this is still ugly. 15:49:20 ack Judy 15:50:55 Judy: often in W3C technical topics come up where vendors differ in approach. Very good opportunity in charter development to find agreement, because later in the process it's more expensive to fork. From media format issue, due to regulatory issues there was much interest in broadcast community on having a standard, but browser vendors differed in opinion. W3C tried to find some common ground. 15:51:28 … broadcast folks complain to W3C that w3C is not creating a standard, but vendors have not reached common ground. 15:52:54 … Probably same need in speech. There has to be discussion about which issues have disagreement. One important piece is ensuring that existing CG work is not misunderstood as a standard. But more fundamental is to have vendors agree on what work to do. Otherwise, w3c will fail to satisfy the rest of us. 15:53:14 … may take longer to get charter launched, but if we don't there will be failure later. 15:53:37 Milan: do we ask for a w3c mediator? 15:54:37 Judy: W3C would rather see a single solution in the end, so we need to find a way to converge approaches. It would be better to have this happen earlier in the process rather than later. Team contacts can help, others if necessary. Tackle the questions. 15:54:51 burn: if questions are political rather that technical?? 15:55:09 s/that/than/ 15:55:11 Judy: yes, that has happened before :) Often they are still technical in the end 15:56:27 … in another group it was very much like this. We started with requirements and discovered that there were differences in requirements for the two sides. Maybe a requirements exercise will help. Sometimes this can point out differences. 15:57:34 Olli: we did spend time on the developments of requirements. Current approach is not too far from the prioritized list of requirements. 15:57:48 Milan: CG met most of them. 15:58:01 Olli: CG only attempted a subset of the requirements. 15:58:39 Dan: something that came out of the req process 15:59:11 ... different participants believed different priorities were important 15:59:45 Judy: This is a difference between CGs and WGs 16:00:04 ... in working group, desenting opinons must be addressed. 16:00:32 ... if W3C director agrees, spec can be stopped 16:02:14 bjkim has left #speech 16:02:35 rrsagent, make log public 16:02:40 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:02:40 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/10/31-speech-minutes.html kaz 16:03:30 i/Google has driven the CG API/scribenick: burn/ 16:04:01 i/something that came out/scribenick: Milan/ 16:04:06 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:04:06 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/10/31-speech-minutes.html kaz 16:04:19 Judy: is the direction of the CG API a set that will prevent filling remaining requirements, then it's a problem. 16:04:26 Milan: No, it's something we can build on. 16:04:33 Judy: this is a good point to be at! 16:04:44 s/is the/if the/ 16:05:07 Judy: this is better than some other W3C situations 16:05:43 s/on having a standard/on having a single standard/ 16:05:52 Debbie: people needing fuller API might want to fork, but I don't think so. Foundation needs features but doesn't prevent proprietary additions. 16:06:22 Milan: let's pull in the CG spec into a WG, get started with implementations and discussion. In the CG, proposed ideas are just met with "no". 16:06:24 ddahl has left #speech 16:06:26 i/is the direction of the CG API/scribenick: burn/ 16:06:39 Judy: yes, in WG that is not allowed to happen. 16:07:01 [ adjourned ] 16:07:06 AndroUser2 has joined #speech 16:07:13 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:07:13 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/10/31-speech-minutes.html kaz 16:07:22 meeting: Sppech and HTML 16:07:24 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:07:24 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/10/31-speech-minutes.html kaz 16:17:50 smaug has joined #speech 16:23:52 Judy has joined #speech 16:26:07 kaz has joined #speech 16:26:26 i/if the direction of the CG API/scribenic: burn/ 16:26:32 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:26:32 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/10/31-speech-minutes.html kaz 16:26:58 i/if the direction of the CG API/scribenick: burn/ 16:27:00 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:27:00 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/10/31-speech-minutes.html kaz 16:27:21 s|scribenic: burn|| 16:27:37 s|i/is the direction of the CG API/scribenick: burn/|| 16:27:40 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:27:40 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/10/31-speech-minutes.html kaz 16:33:08 David_MacD_Lenovo has joined #speech 17:55:29 Zakim has left #speech