VoIP Mailing List Archives

[dougmig33 at yahoo.com]

I'm new to freeswitch.


Is there a vxml parser for freeswitch?


Doug.

[gilbertandrew at mac.com]

Quick answer, it's a switch/b2bua and not a vxml parser.

Longer answer involves questions about what you are trying to do.


If you need quick voice apps, check out the many options including js, lua, python, liverpie, etc. It is a rich set of options and much of this may be more appropriate / productive than full vxml dependent on requirements.


If you have a hard requirement / need for vxml might check out voiceglue.org. This is an asterisk related project, but in theory and with some effort who knows.









On Nov 2, 2008, at 12:36 PM, Douglas Garstang wrote:

[brian at freeswitch.org]

But that doesn't keep us from doing such a thing as an application
interface.

/b



On Nov 2, 2008, at 2:51 PM, Andrew Gilbert wrote:

[dougmig33 at yahoo.com]

Well, the same could be said about Asterisk and yet there are third part vxml parsers (although not very good) available for it.


I have developers that want to write voice applications directly in vxml. They want to use vxml, not js, lua, python or anything else. That's a hard requirement.


I'm surprised freeswitch doesn't have this available. Being able to rapidly deploy voice applications with vxml doesn't seem like an unusual requirement.


Doug.

From: Andrew Gilbert <gilbertandrew@mac.com>
To: freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org
Sent: Sunday, November 2, 2008 12:51:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] VxML Parser?

Quick answer, it's a switch/b2bua and not a vxml parser.

Longer answer involves questions about what you are trying to do.


If you need quick voice apps, check out the many options including js, lua, python, liverpie, etc. It is a rich set of options and much of this may be more appropriate / productive than full vxml dependent on requirements.


If you have a hard requirement / need for vxml might check out voiceglue.org. This is an asterisk related project, but in theory and with some effort who knows.









On Nov 2, 2008, at 12:36 PM, Douglas Garstang wrote:

[edpimentl at gmail.com]

Here..
The most active VoiceXML projects...
http://jvoicexml.sourceforge.net/
http://jvoicexml.sourceforge.net/documentation.htm
http://www.commetrex.com/products/ctmiddleware/bladewarevxml.html
-E

[msc at freeswitch.org]

Doug,


Welcome to FreeSWITCH! BTW, I owe you a thank you because I first heard of FS from one of your posts to the asterisk users list.


FS is definitely designed to be extensible. In fact, one night when Tony was ticked off about a post earlier in the day, he whipped up mod_yaml in three hours! However, I don't believe anyone has yet sung the virtues of VXML to the point of imploring the devs to add it, nor has anyone put up a bounty.


My guess is that VXML would be added at some point. It will happen more quickly if Tony doesn't have to do it gratis if know what I mean.


Hey are you still a Python guy? Just curious if you have played with mod_python or wikipbx yet.


-MC

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 2, 2008, at 1:15 PM, Douglas Garstang < (dougmig33@yahoo.com)[url=mailto:dougmig33@yahoo.com]dougmig33@yahoo.com (dougmig33@yahoo.com)[/url]> wrote:

[gilbertandrew at mac.com]

I am just an observer of FS.  What I am impressed with is the extensibility. And I am curious about xml models (vxml, proprietary xml) vs scripting (lua, python, etc). That is why I asked. 

That said, sounds like the pieces are all waiting for the right motivation and resource set. I can't rule out helping, but can't promise much yet either.


Lastly, curious about the "not very good" part or your response. Is this a reference to OpenVXI or one of it's derivatives?


(and wikipbx does look cool....)






On Nov 2, 2008, at 11:18 PM, Michael S Collins wrote:

[msc at freeswitch.org]

On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 4:12 AM, Andrew Gilbert <gilbertandrew@mac.com (gilbertandrew@mac.com)> wrote:

[dougmig33 at yahoo.com]

Thanks.


Maybe I need to go and get my hands more dirty, but how would freeswitch interface to this? 


Doug.

From: EdPimentl <edpimentl@gmail.com>
To: freeswitch-users@lists.freeswitch.org
Sent: Sunday, November 2, 2008 1:39:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Freeswitch-users] VxML Parser?

Here..
The most active  VoiceXML projects...
http://jvoicexml.sourceforge.net/
http://jvoicexml.sourceforge.net/documentation.htm
http://www.commetrex.com/products/ctmiddleware/bladewarevxml.html
-E

[gilbertandrew at mac.com]

It looks like there are 2 viable vxml parser projects, listed here. The commetrex project is a close relative if not simply OpenVxi. The rev at CMU is older, but the one on SourceForge appears semi-current (3.4). This is also what is being used by VoiceGlue, an integration with Asterisk.


The jvoicexml project is java based and doesn't look to be as far along in terms of tag support. So I spent a few minutes with OpenVXI.


OpenVxi has a set of interfaces one needs to support to make a full fledged voice browser. Some are provided in the reference implementation, such as logging, etc. Others need to be provided, for example call control (VXItel.h), prompting (VXIprompt.h), etc.


Seems like this would all be possible using something like event socket and glue code to implement the required OpenVXI interfaces. Call control and prompting sure seem possible that way. But I would really want someone from FS to comment on whether that makes sense.


If I get more bandwidth over next few days I will try to get OpenVXI built and explore more. But again, having some input from FS devs would be great.


Andy






On Nov 3, 2008, at 11:57 PM, Douglas Garstang wrote:

[anthony.minessale at g...]

You have a few choices on an approach:

1) FreeSWITCH has javascript, xml, TTS, ASR all as existing components so it's possible to just use those
resources to make a home grown parser.

2) I don't know how openVXI or the like are designed but if you can use them as a library and embed them
in a module you could do it that way.

3) If it has to run standalone, yes you can make a middleware to event socket which has its atvantages because you could change what box you are using as the call engine easier but as a trade off you add another point of failure so it's a balanced decision.





On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 8:35 AM, Andrew Gilbert <gilbertandrew@mac.com (gilbertandrew@mac.com)> wrote: