Speech Recognition Grammar Specification (SRGS) is a W3C standard for how speech recognition grammars are specified. A speech recognition grammar is a set of word patterns, and tells a speech recognition system what to expect a human to say. For instance, if you call an auto attendant application, it will prompt you for the name of a person (with the expectation that your call will be transferred to that person's phone). It will then start up a speech recognizer, giving it a speech recognition grammar. This grammar contains the names of the people in the auto attendant's directory and a collection of sentence patterns which are the typical responses from callers to the prompt.
SRGS specifies two alternate but equivalent syntaxes, one based on XML, and one using Augmented BNF format. In practice, the XML syntax is used more frequently.
Both the ABNF Form and XML Form have the expressive power of a Context Free Grammar. A grammar processor that does not support recursive grammars has the expressive power of a Finite State Machine or regular expression language.
If the speech recognizer returned just a string containing the actual words spoken by the user, the voice application would have to do the tedious job of extracting the semantic meaning from those words. For this reason, SRGS grammars can be decorated with tag elements, which when executed, build up the semantic result. SRGS does not specify the contents of the tag elements: this is done in a companion W3C standard, Semantic Interpretation for Speech Recognition (SISR). SISR is based on ECMAScript, and ECMAScript statements inside the SRGS tags build up an ECMAScript semantic result object that is easy for the voice application to process.
Both SRGS and SISR are W3C Recommendations, the final stage of the W3C standards track. The W3C VoiceXML standard, which defines how voice dialogs are specified, depends heavily on SRGS and SISR.
Read more about Speech Recognition Grammar Specification: Examples
Famous quotes containing the words speech, recognition and/or grammar:
“Three words that still have meaning, that I think we can apply to all professional writing, are discovery, originality, invention. The professional writer discovers some aspect of the world and invents out of the speech of his time some particularly apt and original way of putting it down on paper.”
—John Dos Passos (1896–1970)
“Productive collaborations between family and school, therefore, will demand that parents and teachers recognize the critical importance of each other’s participation in the life of the child. This mutuality of knowledge, understanding, and empathy comes not only with a recognition of the child as the central purpose for the collaboration but also with a recognition of the need to maintain roles and relationships with children that are comprehensive, dynamic, and differentiated.”
—Sara Lawrence Lightfoot (20th century)
“Grammar is a tricky, inconsistent thing. Being the backbone of speech and writing, it should, we think, be eminently logical, make perfect sense, like the human skeleton. But, of course, the skeleton is arbitrary, too. Why twelve pairs of ribs rather than eleven or thirteen? Why thirty-two teeth? It has something to do with evolution and functionalism—but only sometimes, not always. So there are aspects of grammar that make good, logical sense, and others that do not.”
—John Simon (b. 1925)