I don't think there are any technical limitations that would prevent other
implementations from conforming to how the behavior is specified in the
spec. We can add more WPT test cases for different phrases and boost
values, but I would caution against constraining the underlying models too
much bec
How likely are different implementations to implement their reaction to
different "boost" values similarly?
If I test my game with a "Zoltan" character (from the explainer's examples)
in different implementations with the same "boost" values, am I likely to
get similar results?
On Tuesday, July
>
> Have you considered a dictionary for SpeechRecognitionPhrase?
>
Early versions of this design included creating a
SpeechRecognitionPhraseList interface as well as a SpeechRecognitionContext
to encapsulate the contextual biasing phrases. The latest consensus is to
accept a suggestion from dome..
Does this basically supersede SpeechGrammar?
☆*PhistucK*
On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 9:11 AM Sangwhan Moon wrote:
> Drive by curiosity question:
>
> Have you considered a dictionary for SpeechRecognitionPhrase?
>
> If mutating individual SpeechRecognitionPhrase instances in
> SpeechRecognition.ph
Drive by curiosity question: Have you considered a dictionary for SpeechRecognitionPhrase?If mutating individual SpeechRecognitionPhrase instances in SpeechRecognition.phrase is an intended use case and also has side-effects, I recon this wouldn't be desirable - but curious if that was considered.A
Sounds good, I've opened a TAG issue for this here:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1121
Please let me know if you have any other feedback!
On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 11:28 AM Dan Clark wrote:
> Thanks for these updates!
>
> I think it's kind of borderline whether there's enough co
(re-sending from the correct account)
Thanks for these updates!
I think it's kind of borderline whether there's enough complexity here to
merit a TAG review. My preference is to go ahead and request one in case
they do have feedback.
-- Dan
On Thursday, July 10, 2025 at 12:59:03 PM UTC-7 ev..
Thanks for these updates!
I think it's kind of borderline whether there's enough complexity here to
merit a TAG review. My preference is to go ahead and request one in case
they do have feedback.
-- Dan
On Thursday, July 10, 2025 at 12:59:03 PM UTC-7 Evan Liu wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> Thank you fo
Hi Dan,
Thank you for the thoughtful feedback. Addressing your points:
*Design Doc Access:* The original document contains some internal
information that can't be shared. I've created a public version of the
design document that you can access here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CBH4r6rxSry
> Design docs
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AW9DxKYNfnt_wruxmd-_M1islS-MgsUVpaNBen-XvHk
I don’t have access to this document. Could it be made available to
non-Googlers?
> TAG review
> None
Can you say why no TAG review?
> Gecko: Positive (https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/
10 matches
Mail list logo
