[Speechsc] Ambiguous description of BARGE-IN-OCCURRED in section 8.8

Slawomir Testowy <slawomir.testowy@gmail.com> Wed, 06 May 2009 07:25 UTC

DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=bGJB1dUIk0ll3IqA9KCURDKqF3PlE3LTDq3uPn/uNzX9cHmEi9LsbnMPLKi1OPAt+r xjl0F/eKFR9ARN6M2p7E5on1SpfL1sTEYd5FYqHFFYxBNEwlCuX32IgtTLkZHhxXsOC/ 2+pi/atpuXXuS/9HIjKPRc14l9LzSvMoWk6jE=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 06 May 2009 09:26:32 +0200
Message-ID: <8681d1580905060026l3763d4e1g40f42e8299af59aa@mail.gmail.com>
From: Slawomir Testowy <slawomir.testowy@gmail.com>
To: speechsc@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Speechsc] Ambiguous description of BARGE-IN-OCCURRED in section 8.8
Precedence: list

Hi,

I am reading draft-18 and I find description of BARGE-IN-0CCURRED
method hard to understand.

> 8.8.  BARGE-IN-OCCURED

There is a typo.

> If a "SPEAK" request is active with kill-on-barge-in enabled, and the
> BARGE-IN-OCCURRED event is received, the synthesizer MUST immediately
> stop streaming out audio.

Must the synthesizer stop streaming out audio if a "SPEAK" request is
in "PAUSED" state?
I couldn't find a definition of "active SPEAK request". I guess it is
a current processed "SPEAK"?

> It MUST also terminate any speech requests
> queued behind the current active one, irrespective of whether they
>  have barge-in enabled or not.

Does this statement depend on previous one? I.e. must the synthesizer
terminate all speech
requests queued behind the current one regardless of kill-on-barge-in
enabled in active "SPEAK"?

> If a barge-in-able "SPEAK" request was
> playing and it was terminated, the response MUST contain the an
> active-request-list header listing the request-ids of all "SPEAK"
> requests that were terminated.  The server generates no
> "SPEAK-COMPLETE" events for these requests.

That sounds good. However, example in section 14.1 says something different:

>  C->S:  MRCP/2.0 289 SPEAK 543259
>        Channel-Identifier:32AECB23433801@speechsynth
>        Kill-On-Barge-In:true
>        Content-Type:application/ssml+xml
>        Content-Length:418
>        Content-Length:...

[...]

>   S->C:  MRCP/2.0 52 543259 200 IN-PROGRESS
>         Channel-Identifier:32AECB23433801@speechsynth
>         Speech-Marker:timestamp=857207696314

[...]

> C->S:  MRCP/2.0 69 BARGE-IN-OCCURRED 543259
>         Channel-Identifier:32AECB23433801@speechsynth
>          Proxy-Sync-Id:987654321
>
>   S->C:  MRCP/2.0 72 543259 200 COMPLETE
>         Channel-Identifier:32AECB23433801@speechsynth
>          Active-Request-Id-List:543258
>          Speech-Marker:timestamp=857206096314
>
>   S->C:  MRCP/2.0 73 SPEAK-COMPLETE 543259 COMPLETE
>         Channel-Identifier:32AECB23433801@speechsynth
>         Completion-Cause:001 barge-in
>         Speech-Marker:timestamp=857207685213

Moreover, request BARGE-IN-OCCURRED has the same request-id
as previous SPEAK. Is this correct?

--
Slawomir Testowy

[Speechsc] Ambiguous description of BARGE-IN-OCCU… Slawomir Testowy
Re: [Speechsc] Ambiguous description of BARGE-IN-… Dan Burnett
Re: [Speechsc] Ambiguous description of BARGE-IN-… Slawomir Testowy