These are the final results of the Community Draft Ballot for JSR #113. The Executive Committee for ME has approved this ballot.
JSR113
StageCommunity Draft Ballot
Ballot durationJun 15, 2004 to Jun 21, 2004
Votes

ME

Ericsson AB
IBM
Insignia Solutions
Intel Corp.
Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.
Motorola
Nokia Corporation
Philips Electronics UK Ltd
Research In Motion, LTD (RIM)
Siemens AG
Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications AB
Sony International (Europe) GmbH
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Symbian Ltd
Texas Instruments Inc.
Vodafone Group Services Limited
Vote Log

ME

On 2004-06-18 Ericsson AB voted Yes with the following comment:
Ericsson Mobile Platforms recommends that the JSR overview section be amended to provide a clearer description of the API and encourages inclusion of use-cases. The API seems complicated for the target platform (CLDC 1.0/MIDP 1.0). We would also like the Expert Group to consider the issue that it may be hard (or impossible) for an application developer to develop a speech application running on many devices, as what can be done with speech in the application depends on the (native) engine, whose capabilites are not known in general. We understand that PMO is working with the Spec Lead to resolve the specification license issue.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-06-18 Sun Microsystems, Inc. voted Yes with the following comment:
Sun's 'yes' vote on this ballot is based on the technical merits of
the work.  We observe that there might be an issue with the supplied
specification license, but we trust that the spec lead will resolve
this before the next ballot.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-06-20 Intel Corp. voted Yes with the following comment:
This comment is not related to the issue Sun referred to in their vote comments.

The current JCP Process says "The Spec Lead will provide the EC with the terms under which the RI and TCK will be licensed no later than the start of JSR Review."  JSR 113 is operating under an older version of the Process and even under the newer version TCK terms supplied are often so general as not to be informative.  

Even though there is no firm requirement, many JSRs provide clear information about the rough expected cost of licensing the TCK.  Every compatible implementation must license the TCK and the Spec Lead alone determines the Terms under which it is licensed, so it is very useful to have at least a rough idea of what the cost will be.  We encourage the spec lead to provide more information on TCK terms and conditions in the future.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-06-21 Nokia Corporation voted No with the following comment:
We find the general functional coverage of this API ok. However this API is very complicated and large and almost a speech recognition expert is needed to write applications to this API. We do not see that this would suit well to the CLDC/MIDP environment. We urge the EG to find ways to make this more suitable for more average developers, for example with some simpler optional API portion with higher abstraction level. We decided to vote no at this point, but can reverse it in later stages.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-06-21 Insignia Solutions voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-06-21 Symbian Ltd voted No with the following comment:
This is a complex API with associated performance and footprint concerns.

In the medium term we expect speech recognition and synthesis to be important smart phone technologies. However we don't see strong near term demand and there is thus time to reconsider the APIs. We recommend that the EG  concentrate on meeting the requirements of specific use cases. These should be clearly articulated, and should include the expected capabilities of the target devices.

We would also comment that the class naming convention is unusual, and method naming conventions are inconsistent in places.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-06-21 IBM voted Yes with the following comment:
IBM's vote is based on the technical merits of this JSR and is not a vote on the licensing terms.  IBM supports licensing models that create an open and level playing field by allowing third parties to create independent implementations of Java Specifications and that do not allow individuals or companies to exercise unnecessary control for proprietary advantage.  We support open source as a licensing model for contributions in the JCP, and would hope others will support this direction.   This comment is not necessarily directed at the current business or license terms for this JSR, however, it is a statement of IBM's preferred licensing model.

IBM feels that dictation API's should be considered.  Embedded dictation will very likely be a reality during the lifecycle of the JSAPI 2.0 specification, so we should attempt to include support for this technology.  At a minimum, we should re-add the dictation API's that were present in JSAPI 1.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-06-21 Research In Motion, LTD (RIM) voted No with the following comment:
The JSR seems too large for the intended mobile platforms that support CLDC and MIDP.  It also introduces limited Locale and bean support which seems premature without CLDC configuration support (what is a CLDC bean? CLDC doesn't support full localization).  Furthermore, requiring both speech input and output seems wasteful for constrained mobile devices.  Splitting the JSR into speech input and output building blocks seems more restrained and productive.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-06-21 Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-06-21 Siemens AG voted Abstain with the following comment:
Siemens' vote is based on the technical merits  of this JSR. It is not clear to us how this can be implemented on a J2ME platform given that it references java beans. 
We also understand that the PMO is working together with the spec lead to resolve the licensing issues.
As there are these open issues we decided to vote "abstain" at this point.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------