Stu,

Sorry for being silent up until now but unfortunately due to a lack of any real 
success my managers have got me working on a multi-modal project that doesn't 
use RDC.

I've read through the previous messages and I can readily appreciate Stu's 
frustration however all I can do is give you what little I know.

In the link highlighted by Rahul I didn't use the compatibility attribute - 
found this didn't work which at the time was nothing new (sigh!).  Instead I 
used instead one <tag><![CDATA[<=$a>]]></tag>.  Now you are saying that CDATA 
tags cause compilation problems - me too but only when I used multiple CDATA 
tags.  Using one corrected the problem but I don't know why.  I haven't used 
either of the development environments you listed just Nuance with sp3/4.

Might it be possible to dump the idea of using Nuance's version of GrXML (which 
it seems is just a wrapper around GSL)and use instead their GSL.  I say this as 
struggling with Nuance GrXML may be a fruitless enterprise if Nuance get around 
to supporting GrXML properly then in theory you should be able to use the 
gramars given.  In the meantime writing GSL grammars may be a more productive 
workaround.  

Steve Hodson
VoxGen 
Manor House, 21 Soho Square 
London W1D 3QP

Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +44 (0)870 350 2100
Fax: +44 (0)870 350 2101
Direct: +44 (0)20 7851 1025



-----Original Message-----
From: Stu Robertson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 14 June 2005 04:59
To: Tag Libraries Developers List
Subject: Re: RDC: Plan B for getting Nuance to work with RDCs


I would really like to find out more about Steve's success with the  
grammar listed in his post.  Whenever I try using CDATA in a tag, I  
get a compile error in the grammar, including when I use the grammar  
he mentioned worked for him.  This is in the current development  
environment of both community.voxeo.com and also cafe.bevocal.com.

I'm certainly at a dead end with this for now, so I guess I'll give  
the group a few days to see what they can turn up.  I won't redo the  
grammars unless we need to, but I was really hoping to be able to get  
past the compatibility issues by now.  We are still unable to test  
anything until 1) IBM's 6.0 Toolkit comes out for real (we can't get  
the test environment/simulator to work reliably at all) or 2) we get  
RDCs working on a Nuance platform, for which there are free  
development environments readily available.  The latter will make a  
great wiki addition once we get it working.

As for deployment plans, we have both IBM's voice response/server and  
a Nortel platform in house.  Nortel uses Nuance grammars.

As for using different resource bundles to support different platform  
grammars, will that work well if we also have separate grammars for  
internationalization?  I need to look at the RDC implementation a bit  
more, but that's the first question that comes to mind.

G'night  :-)

Stu
On Jun 13, 2005, at 4:23 PM, Rahul P Akolkar wrote:

> <detour>Steve, if you're listening, can you give Stu some details  
> about
> your Nuance setup?</detour>
>
> Stu Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 06/13/2005 04:23:03 PM:
>
>> Hmm.  I'm starting to suspect that nuance folks mainly use GSL.  I'm
>> still hoping for some help from the newsgroup posts I've made to
>> voxeo and bevocal, but I'm not counting on it.
>>
>
> Give that a day or two Stu. I dug up what Steve was saying here [
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=taglibs- 
> dev&m=111530442607124&w=2 ], and
> whatever variant of the Nuance platform he was using seems to  
> process the
> SI correctly. Are you sure the test environment you're using is upto
> speed? How long will you be deploying on this setup in the future? I
> suspect at some time, you'll move to an in-house arrangement? If so, I
> wouldn't spend too much time on re-doing the grammars, I'd save the
> efforts for the real deal. Just my two cents worth (but, based on  
> personal
> experience).
>
>
>> If we're likely to have separate grammars I'm considering just using
>> GSL for nuance.  RDCs still abstract the app from the grammars, and
>> hopefully longer term we can just use SRGS for both.  It's a pain
>> though, since we'll need to have internationalization for RDCs to be
>> widely adopted, and GSL would double that work.
>>
>
> Agreed, cross-products are no joy. Thankfully, this is search  
> replace type
> of authoring, if it comes to that.
>
>
>> I agree it'd be fine to have the grammar-type/platform specified in
>> an init parm.  The next question is where to put the grammars.  What
>> about creating two sub dirs under .grammar, one for srgs and one for
>> gsl?  The servlet would use the init parm to figure out which to
>> use.  There's the issue of file name suffixes of course.  If you
>> think this is a reasonable approach, I'll take a stab at the
>> necessary changes.
>>
>
> Sure, new directory is a good idea. But the directory structure or  
> suffix
> has nothing to do with what grammar is picked up, it will be the  
> resource
> bundle that dictates this. The directory or suffix will really be  
> just a
> visual cue for developers.
>
> For example, RDCs pick up prompts and grammars for en_US locale  
> from here
> [
> http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/jakarta-taglibs-sandbox/rdc/src/ 
> org/apache/taglibs/rdc/resources/RDCBundle_en_US.properties? 
> view=markup
> ]. Lets have a locale variant called Nuance, and have that resource  
> bundle
> point to the correct grammars (AFAIK, variants can be made up). A  
> brief
> read on the current internationalization support in RDCs is here [
> http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-taglibs/ReusableDialogComponents/ 
> Tutorials/I18N
> ].
>
>
>> Hopefully somebody will help us get nuance srgs to work and make the
>> GSL part unnecessary...though we'd still probably need the subdirs
>> for grammars.
>>
>
> Works for me, got nothing against arranging resources  
> systematically ;-)
>
> -Rahul
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

#####################################################################################
Winner - e-Government excellence 2004. 
Runner up - European Information Management awards 2004:
- The Premier Project Award. 
- B2C Commerce Project Award. 
- CRM Project Award. 

For more information visit us at www.voxgen.com

#####################################################################################
Note:
This message is for the named person's use only.  It may contain confidential,
proprietary or legally privileged information.  No confidentiality or privilege
is waived or lost by any mistransmission.  If you receive this message in error,
please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any
hard copies of it and notify the sender.  You must not, directly or indirectly,
use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are 
not
the intended recipient. Vox Generation Limited and any of its subsidiaries each 
reserve the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks.

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except 
where
the message states otherwise and the sender is authorised to state them to be 
the
views of any such entity.

Thank You.
#####################################################################################

#####################################################################################
This e-mail message has been scanned for Viruses and Content and cleared 
by NetIQ MailMarshal
#####################################################################################

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to