Subject: Re: [nmrg] Intent Classification Draft Updates for 0.3 version

From: 孙雪媛 <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 17:04:09 +0800

Hi Laurent, Jerome,
As the authors of the Intent Classification Draft, we are actively working to update the draft .From your original comments:
"It is clearly valuable to have some concrete examples of intents from different perspectives. It will help the global understanding of IBN but I have the same concerns as others expressed in the mailing list. It is unclear what are the criteria of classification and why those criteria have been selected and how much representative they are.
As an intent definition can come from different perspectives (technical or business for instance), a unique methodology for classification should be proposed to integrate all of them. It will be a good value for such a document. Using then examples to validate the classification methodology should be more documented with references in my opinion. "
We  created 3 comments out of this (1, 5 and 9) as follows:

with comment 9 referring to the examples. Could you please let us know if our understanding of your comments, proposed solutions and the updated introduction are aligned with your comments?

Best Regards,
SUN Xueyuan

孙雪媛   SUN Xueyuan
中国电信战略与创新研究院 China Telecom Research Institute
Tel：010-50902887/ 17316269362
Email：[email-masked]
 
From: Olga Havel
Date: 2020-02-25 02:02
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: [nmrg] Intent Classification Draft Updates for 0.3 version
Dear all,
 
Here is the summary table with review comments we received for Intent Classification Draft v0.2. I added some proposed candidate solutions for review/comments. Our joint goal should be to resolve comments satisfactory. Therefore, could the comment authors please let me know if the proposed solutions are acceptable to them and if so, we will start/continue working on the changes and engage with them. If I missed any reviewer or any comment, please let me know.
 
So, I would please ask the following comment authors to review their comments and proposed solutions in the attached tables and share if the solutions are acceptable to them. In the case of 2 Candidates, please share your preference.
-          Jürgen Schönwälder (comments 1, 2, 3, 4)
-          Jérôme François (comments 1, 5, 9)
-          Laurent Ciavaglia (comments 1, 5)
-          Natale Bob (comment 6)
-          Yehia Elkhatib (comment 7)
-          Branislav Meandzija (comment 8)
 
If anyone else, especially document authors, have any other suggestions, please don’t be shy. 

 
Best Regards,
Olga