[alicebot-archcomm] 3D FACEs

[Conan Callen]

>   I agree with the idea of a constant interface for clients, but I don't
> think that modifying the AIML spec itself to incorporate facial expressions
> is a good idea.
That is exactly what I would like to see be avoided too, changing
the spec for every new technology that comes along.

I too am not in a big hurry to implement voice, facial or other extension
to the AIML spec, I would rather see a client or third party
implement this kind of thing. My intention was to suggest that focus is
placed on providing an extension mechnism, which is not to say that this
list is not already doing a lot of work in this area already. Then it
doesnt matter what technology anyone uses, weather its open source,
commercial or any other thing.

For instance, the XML can be extended though the use of schemas, as
in VoiceXML or HRXML, without effecting the XML spec itself. If you
decided to create an app that used HRXML you would not be required to also
implement VoiceXML just because both HRXML and VoiceXML are based on XML.
And the XML spec did not have to be changed to accomidate either.
Although the clients and servers may need to be modified to support
VoiceXML, HRXML or some other schema.

>   The mechanism is correct (embedding the additional information into the
> template), allthough I personally think that the issue of tagset & filtering
> should be wholly left to each individual client/server implementation,
> without including it into the AIML specification (at least not now).
A proprietary extension is typical in this situation.

>   Let people first make such a system (they can even use Program D as a base
> if they want). Let the developers resolve all issues (tagset, protocol, how
> to register different drivers, how to query capabilities...) and then show
> the comitee the working results.
> I'm afraid the opposite approach (first let
> the comitee work it out, then implement it) has very rarely worked out,
> often resulting in quite heated arguments (flame wars), and then the issue
> is forgotten anyways.
Good point, I agree. I didnt mean to suggest that the committy do
anything at this point. Rather it was meant to be the act of sharing
an idea.

>Use the regular list, or the developers list.
Please do not mis-construe my comments as a proposal, I was just trying
to contribut and be a constructive part of this list :)
I was afraid that if I posted this idea to the regular or developers
list I would get flamed. Which was, what I believed was, the outcome of a
previous thread where it was agreed that new ideas should not be posted to
the other lists until they were discussed on this list.

Conan