ENABLING VOCAL INTERACTION IN
A WEB PORTAL ENVIRONMENT
Federico Bergenti, Lorenzo Lazzari, Marco Mari, Agostino Poggi
Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell’Informazione, Università degli Studi di Parma,
Parco Area delle Scienze 181/A, 43100, Parma, Italia
Keywords: Web portals, Vocal interaction, Human-computer interaction.
Abstract: The growing request of innovative, multimodal interfaces for mobile users and the need of different
navigation paradigms for impaired Internet users are promoting and driving nowadays research on
multimodal interactions. In this paper we present our experiences in the integration of vocal components in
a portal engine, namely Apache Jetspeed. First, we discuss the reasons why the integration of a full-featured
portal brings significant advantages to the development of a vocal platform. Then, we describe two
complementary approaches for enhancing portals with vocal capabilities, and we compare them under
various standpoints. The first approach that we investigate is based on a server-side speech synthesizer,
while the second relies on client-side technologies, X+V and the SALT markup languages. For each of these
approaches we present some examples and we discuss advantages and drawbacks.
1 INTRODUCTION
In last few years the development of the Internet has
brought a great amount of information and services
to an enormous number of users. At the same time,
mobile devices and wireless networks have
significantly widened their capabilities from simple
voice calls to the hybrid, converged services and fast
navigation of the Internet that third generation
UMTS devices support. The necessary convergence
of the technologies for wireline and wireless
networks has provided users with the capability of
accessing information and services from anywhere,
at anytime. In this scenario, the differences between
input/output devices of desktop computers, mobile
phones and PDAs are pushing researchers to define
new interaction methods, beyond traditional
interaction with keyboard and mouse, capable of
overcoming such differences. An important example
of these efforts is the formation of the W3C
Multimodal Interaction Activity, with the aim of
extending the user interface of the Web to allow
multiple modes of interaction, e.g. vocal, visual and
tactile. Moreover, the research in new interaction
methods raises to a higher level of importance in
consideration of the utility of such methods for the
navigation of impaired Internet users, thus
increasing the accessibility of the Web to people
with visual or other disabilities.
Taking into account the requirements of mobile
navigation and accessibility of multiple,
personalized contents, portal technologies occupy a
key role in future development of ubiquitous and
integrated applications. A portal is a central hub that
can simplify and personalize access to
heterogeneous services, applications and
information. These characteristics turn a portal into
an ideal gateway to the Internet for impaired
navigators. Moreover, everyday portal engines
facilitate the access to their contents from mobile
devices, and they also provide transparent adaptation
of such contents to the characteristics of end users’
devices, as we will see in the following section.
In this paper we present our experiences in the
direction of enhancing the interaction methods
offered by a portal system, namely Apache Jetspeed,
in order to provide users with a vocal interface. In
Section 2 we discuss some related work, while in
Section 3 we summarize the key features of the
portal engine that we used and we explain why a
portal engine can facilitate the development of a
vocal or multimodal platform. In sections 4 and 5 we
describe in detail the two complementary
approaches that we followed to integrate voice
capabilities into the portal. Finally, section 6 is
dedicated to a comparative discussion of these two
approaches and to an outline of our future work.
318
Bergenti F., Lazzari L., Mari M. and Poggi A. (2006).
ENABLING VOCAL INTERACTION IN A WEB PORTAL ENVIRONMENT.
In Proceedings of WEBIST 2006 - Second International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - Internet Technology / Web
Interface and Applications, pages 318-324
DOI: 10.5220/0001239203180324
Copyright
c
 SciTePress

2 EXISTING STANDARDS AND
RELATED WORK
2.1 EMMA, X+V and SALT
The starting point for investigating the actual status
of multimodal technologies is without any doubt the
W3C Multimodal Interaction Activity home page.
The main objective of this workgroup is to extend
the Web to allow users to dynamically select the
most appropriate mode of interaction on the basis of
their current needs, while enabling developers to
provide an effective user interface for whichever
modes the user selects. The modes that the W3C
Multimodal Interaction Activity considers for input
are speech, handwriting and keystrokes, while
output can be presented via displays, pre-recorded
and synthetic speech, audio, and tactile mechanisms,
e.g., mobile phone vibrators and Braille strips. An
important result of the W3C Multimodal Interaction
Activity workgroup is the recent definition of
EMMA (Extensible MultiModal Annotation Markup
Language), a language used to represent human
input to a multimodal application. An example of
interpretation of a user input that EMMA facilitates
is the transcription into words of a raw signal, for
instance derived from speech, pen or keystroke
input.
The specification of EMMA is so recent that it is
not yet possible to find tools supporting this new
language. However, waiting for EMMA-compliant
tools, we can still test multimodal (in particular
vocal) applications using two standards that have
provided a strong contribution to EMMA: X+V and
SALT.
X+V (XHTML + Voice) has the aim to integrate
two mature standards, i.e., XHTML and VoiceXML,
to bring spoken interaction to the Web, i.e., creating
multimodal dialogs that combine the visual input
mode and speech input and output. X+V is sustained
by a consortium comprising IBM, Motorola and
Opera Software.
The SALT (Speech Application Language Tags)
Forum groups different companies, which includes
Microsoft, Intel and Cisco, sharing a common
interest in developing and promoting speech
technologies for multimodal and telephony
applications. SALT specification extends existing
mark-up languages, i.e., HTML, XHTML and XML,
enabling multimodal and telephony access to the
Web.
2.2 Related Work
Multimodal and vocal interaction means are a
longstanding research problem. Already in 1992,
Cohen (Cohen, 1992) suggested that the focus
should not only be on building interfaces that make
available two or more communication modalities,
rather on developing integrated interfaces in which
the modalities forge a productive synthesis, using
the strengths of one modality to overcome
weaknesses of another.
It is possible to distinguish three kinds of reason
(Sharma et al., 1998) for using a multimodal
interface in human computer interaction (HCI):
− Practical: traditional HCI systems are
unnatural and cumbersome. Moreover, redundant or
alternative input sources can help impaired users to
access computer applications.
− Biological: human beings, as well as other
animals, integrate multiple senses. This strongly
suggests that the use of multimodality in HCI would
be desirable, especially if the goal is to incorporate
the naturalness of human communication in HCI.
− Mathematical: it is statistically advantageous
to combine multiple observations from the same
source because improved estimates are obtained
using redundant observations. In this way, the
concurrent use of two or more interaction modalities
may improve system reliability.
Multimodality can be defined from human and
technology perspectives (Baber et al., 2001). From
the human point of view, people can exchange
information using different sensory modalities, and
so a multimodal system would support more than
one sensory and response modality. From the
technology point of view, computer systems can
receive and present information using different
modes, and so multimodality is the capability of a
system to allow combination of modes to operate
concurrently. Given these definitions, we can point
out one of the main problems of multimodality: the
design of systems capable of fully supporting
concurrent, alternative modes.
Several research works aim to define multimodal
interfaces combining different interaction modes.
Moran presents an agent-based interface that focuses
on voice and pen input, and supported by a gestures-
recognition engine (Moran et al., 1997). Again, the
SmartKom system (Wahlster et al., 2001) merges
three paradigms: spoken dialogue, graphical user
interfaces and gestural interaction. For the two latter
paradigms, SmartKom does not use a traditional
WIMP (Windows, Icons, Menus, Pointer) interface
combined together with gesture recognition; instead,
it supports natural gestural interaction combined
with facial expressions. Another valuable
ENABLING VOCAL INTERACTION IN A WEB PORTAL ENVIRONMENT
319

characteristic of SmartKom is that it spans across a
number of different platforms and application
scenarios: the kernel functionalities are portable to a
wide range of devices. MOUE (Lisetti et al., 2003)
is a system whose main characteristic is the ability to
build a model of user’s emotions by observing the
user via multi-sensory devices, i.e., camera,
microphone and wearable computer. This system
can have a wide range of applications, like tele-
monitoring and healthcare. MEDITOR system
(Bellik, 1997) applies multimodal interfaces,
including speech recognition, synthesis, and Braille
terminals, to provide improved computer access to
blinds.
Thus some portal solutions (e.g.: IBM
WebSphere Portal) offer support for multimodal
applications, and despite the amount of research in
this field, to the best of our knowledge this is the
first paper to discuss the integration of a vocal mode
in a portal engine (both for the interface and the
contents). The benefits of such a solution will be
described in detail in the next section.
3 PORTAL ENGINES
In our vision, the research in innovative and
multimodal interaction paradigms has two main
goals: (i) to facilitate the navigation for impaired
users; and (ii) to improve the usability of ubiquitous
applications. In both cases, the integration of a portal
engine can bring significant advantages. In fact, a
portal acts as a common layer on which it is possible
to integrate heterogeneous applications and contents
in a personalized way, without exploring several,
different sites, and thus facilitating the navigation
for both mobile and impaired users. Moreover, the
adaptation of portal pages to the characteristics of
mobile devices is easier than the adaptation of
generic Web pages because a portal engine provides
natively a set of tools for performing such adaptation
almost transparently. This last argument has already
been discussed in a previous paper (Mari et al.,
2004), so in this section we only summarize the
reasons why a portal is an ideal platform for
providing contents to mobile devices:
− Content adaptation applies to single
portlets, not to entire portal pages. Portlets are the
base components of a portal, the elements that
process a request and generate dynamic contents.
Therefore, the content of a portlet is generally
shorter and easier to adapt than the content of a
whole page.
− The design of the user interface (and
therefore the usability of the portal) is separated
from the content it presents, therefore a different
interface can be specified for each class of
devices.
− The disposition of the portlets on the page
is separated from the content they present and a
different disposition can be provided for each
class of devices.
− The portal can easily be extended with the
support for new classes of devices.
Therefore, a portal provides an environment in
which it is possible to create and adapt separately the
contents, the user interface and the content
disposition.
Another relevant advantage portals provide is
suggested by the works of Dybkjaer (Dybkjaer et al.,
2004) and Walker (Walker et al., 2004). The
conclusion section of Dybkjaer et al. discusses the
benefits of a user modelling facility, in order to
adapt the behaviour and the dialogues generated by
the system, while in Walker et al. the generation of
answers for users is fully tailored on the basis of
user profiles. A portal engine always includes a user
database that can contain all relevant information for
this profiling. Moreover, this database can be
updated on the fly, following a possible change of
user preferences during system navigation (e.g., a
user enters a portion of the portal in which vocal
interaction is not desirable).
The portal we used in our research is Jetspeed
1.5, an open source implementation of an enterprise
information portal. Jetspeed is part of Portals, a top-
level project of the Apache Software Foundation
(ASF). Jetspeed provides portal view customization
and access to information on the basis of user
capabilities: it acts as the central hub where
information from multiple sources is made available
in an easy to use manner. Therefore, each user can
access to a subset of the information/applications
available and select the part which she/he is
interested in.
The off-the-shelf version of Jetspeed can only
serve content to PCs and WAP devices. In a past
work, we developed (Mari et al., 2004) an add-on
for Jetspeed that provides the portal with the
capability of supporting other mobile devices, i.e.,
PDAs and I-Mode terminals (I-Mode is the Internet
access system offered by the Japanese operator NTT
DoCoMo). This add-on is useful to test the results of
our research on various platforms, both emulators
and real devices. We are also developing an add-on
that provides real-time user profiling, analyzing user
WEBIST 2006 - WEB INTERFACES AND APPLICATIONS
320

actions and changing the system behaviour on the
basis of user preferences.
4 ENABLING A VOCAL MODE
The first approach we entailed to enhance the portal
navigation experience with voice was to add a vocal
mode to all portal content. In this way, each part of
the portal can be read or heart by the user. For this
purpose, we integrated a speech synthesizer in a
servlet, then we created a tool to access the
synthesizer from the portal, and finally we modified
the portal structure to make the new functionality
available transparently to all portlets.
Before describing in more detail this work, it is
important to remember that the content of a portal is
composed by portlets, and from each single portlet it
is possible to access external applications, RSS
feeds, Web services, corporate contents, and so on.
4.1 FreeTTS
After an accurate analysis of the available speech
synthesizers, we decided to develop the speech
synthesis module of our add-on to Jetspeed using
FreeTTS. FreeTTS is a speech synthesis engine
written entirely in Java and it is based on Flite, a
small runtime speech synthesis engine developed at
Carnegie Mellon University. FreeTTS has been
developed by the Speech Integration Group of Sun
Microsystems Laboratories and it is distributed with
an open source, BSD-style licence. The main
reasons that brought us to the choice of FreeTTS are:
− Support for JSAPI 1.0 specification. JSAPI
are the standard Java interfaces for incorporating
speech capabilities in a Java program. Moreover,
FreeTTS provides its own libraries with added
functionalities, e.g., the direct redirection of audio
sources to a remote client.
− Being a Java program and an open source
project, it is easy to adapt and to integrate in the
architecture of our project. Jetspeed is structured
as a servlet, and so the best solution is to also
have the speech synthesizer available in the
servlet itself.
− Among the suggested uses, authors
included a sample remote TTS server, whose
behaviour is similar to our requirements: FreeTTS
can act as a back-end text-to-speech engine that
works with a speech/telephony system.
− The internal speech synthesis engine has
been recently enhanced to provide optimal
performances.
FreeTTS has been integrated in a servlet, and all
synthesizer configurations (i.e.: the voice selections)
are made available through a Web interface. The
integration has been tested with the Apache Tomcat
servlet engine, giving good results and
performances.
4.2 Portal Integration
For providing text-to-speech functionalities to
Jetspeed, we developed a portal module called
TextToSpeech Service. This module is designed as a
pluggable service of Turbine, the framework on
which Jetspeed is built. This service is a set of
classes, based on the Singleton design pattern, with
utility methods that can be called from every part of
the portal. It is worth noting that the architecture of
this service is not tied to FreeTTS, so, in the future,
we could provide implementations of our service on
the basis on other synthesizers.
Having the text-to-speech functionalities
available, next step was to introduce the vocal mode
in the portal core features. Jetspeed defines a set of
standard modes for each portlet: view, customize,
info, print, minimize and maximize. On the basis of
the portlet type and of the administrator policies, a
portlet can have one or more modes available, while
the user can select in which the portlet is displayed.
A new mode has been defined: the vocal mode. In
the Web user interface, the vocal mode is presented
as a new icon near the portlet title (see figure 1). As
for the other modes, the portlet can declare in its
registry if the vocal support is provided. From a
functional point of view, the introduction of the
vocal mode means that the user can trigger another
type of action. This action was defined in the
interfaces and in the abstract classes that describe
the portlet state and methods. A detailed description
of the modifications in Jetspeed code is beyond the
scope of this paper. When the user triggers the vocal
action, the portlet generates a call to the
TextToSpeech service, the service in his turn
activates the FreeTTS synthesizer, passing the
portlet content to the speech synthesis engine.
Figure 1: The vocal mode in the Web user interface of Jetspeed.
ENABLING VOCAL INTERACTION IN A WEB PORTAL ENVIRONMENT
321

By default, the vocal mode is activated only
when the user selects the corresponding icon, but it
is possible to force the activation whenever a user
interacts with a vocal portlet.
4.3 Example Portlets
As an example of vocal-enabled portlet, we
implemented the vocal mode for two of the most
common portlet types of Jetspeed: RSS (Rich Site
Summary) and Velocity.
RSS portlets are used to retrieve news from
remote sources: they take an RSS feed from a
remote server, apply an XSLT transformation to the
feed content and present the result in the portal
screen. The sample RSS portlets provided with
Jetspeed are BBC Front Page news, ApacheWeek
and XMLHack. When a user clicks on the vocal
icon, the TextToSpeech service synthesizes the
content of the news and sends the audio stream to
the client device.
Apache Velocity is a simple, yet powerful,
template engine used to develop Web applications
following the MVC (Model-View-Controller)
model. All Jetspeed screens and most portlet
templates are written using Velocity. When a
Velocity portlet generates its content, it looks for a
template according to the media type of the user
(e.g., HTML and WML). Thanks to the new vocal
support, developers can also write templates for the
vocal mode. The content of Velocity templates is
inherently dynamic, and therefore the audio stream
sent to the user is not a static description of the
portlet, rather it follows the user-portal interaction.
For example, the speech can present the results of a
query to a database, or it can answer to the inputs of
a user compiling a form.
5 A DEEPER INTERACTION
USING MARKUP LANGUAGES
Although the vocal mode provided by a simple
speech synthesizer like FreeTTS can significantly
improve the navigation experience of the user, a
more complete vocal interaction between the user
and the portal is achieved only with a dedicated
markup language. For this reason, our second
approach was to include in Jetspeed the support for
X+V and SALT: the integration procedure is similar
for both languages, and it is described in the next
section.
5.1 New Media in the Portal
The presentation of portal pages is strongly
dependent on the media type associated with the
client browser. On the basis of the media type, the
portal selects what portlets can be shown and it finds
out the templates to use with such portlets. For
example, a portlet could not be suitable for mobile
devices, or it could use different templates for
desktop computers and PDAs.
All portal elements (portlets, media types,
clients, etc.) are stored in local XML registry files.
Jetspeed associates the client browser with a media
type after analyzing the browser description in the
registry. For this reason, we changed the portal
registry with the descriptions of three browsers
supporting X+V and/or SALT. We have then added
two media types, called X+V and SALT, to the
registry, and we linked browsers descriptions with
the corresponding media types. At this point, it is
possible to build the portal for the new media types,
creating portal pages and portlets with fragments of
X+V or SALT markup in their templates.
5.2 Testing
As a matter of facts, neither X+V nor SALT, are
widely accepted standards and they are not
supported by everyday browsers. For example, in
order to test SALT with Internet Explorer, it is
necessary to download the Microsoft Speech
Application Software Development Kit, that requires
a previous installation of Internet Information
Services and of the .NET Framework. We decided to
test the portal with three products available free of
charge and based on browsers used by a large
community:
− Opera Beta 8: it is the first version of a
widely used browser that comes with the support
for vocal interaction. The support is activated
downloading an add-on that enables X+V
management.
− Access NetFront for Pocket PC: this
version of NetFront supports X+V markup, and it
is the result of a partnership between Access and
IBM. Thanks to this browser, we succeeded in
testing vocal portal navigation from a mobile
device.
− OpenSALT: this open source project makes
available a SALT compliant browser based on
Mozilla.
We have tested the new media added to Jetspeed
by including in all portal pages a set of testing
portlets. These portlets have been built from the
examples provided by the three browsers’.
WEBIST 2006 - WEB INTERFACES AND APPLICATIONS
322

developers and by X+V and SALT specifications.
The new portlets enable vocal interaction with users:
a user fills the fields of a form using its voice, and
the portlet can answer with instructions or
comments. A portal screen with vocal portlets is
shown in figure 2. All tests have been positive, the
portal preserves the original behaviour of the
examples, and, above all, the results of the
interaction (e.g.: the contents of a form) are
available from the portlet classes. In this way it is
possible to develop complex portlet applications
based on the vocal interaction between user and
portal.
6 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE
WORK
In this paper we presented two approaches for
providing a portal engine with the capability to
communicate and to receive inputs using voice. This
vocal interaction is a first, significant, step to reach a
more complete multimodal interaction. We believe
that the introduction of multimodality will play a
significant role in the future of human computer
interaction, mainly for two reasons: the growing
request of innovative interfaces for mobile devices
and the need of different interaction paradigms for
the navigation of impaired Internet users.
We focused our research on portal engines,
rather than on more generic Web sites, because of
their capability of integrating heterogeneous
applications and contents, without the need for users
to explore manually several, different sites, and thus
facilitating the navigation for both mobile and
impaired users. Moreover, portal contents are easily
adapted to mobile devices, and the interaction with
users can be tailored on the basis of user profiling
functionalities that portals normally provide.
The two approaches that we followed for
enabling the vocal interaction are complementary,
and each of them has advantages and drawbacks.
The first approach generates an audio stream on the
server and sends it to the client, so that the vocal
interaction is possible only from the portal to the
user. This process drains server resources and
bandwidth, but our tests demonstrated that a
synthesizer like FreeTTS can grant good
performances also with several users connected. The
main advantage of this approach is that it does not
require a dedicated client, it works with every
browser that can receive audio streams. The second
approach is based on markup languages designed for
client-side vocal interaction: it is the best way to
enable a bidirectional vocal communication between
portal and user, and it does not employ extra server
resources or bandwidth. The drawbacks lie in the
need of dedicated, uncommon browsers and in the
higher computational power required to the client
devices. Taking into account advantages and
Figure 2: Portal screen with sample multimodal portlets.
ENABLING VOCAL INTERACTION IN A WEB PORTAL ENVIRONMENT
323

drawbacks, we believe that both approaches can
coexist in the same portal: the user selects his
preferred method, according to the characteristics of
the client device and of the connection.
Our future research includes the extension of this
work to the EMMA language, as soon as EMMA-
enabled browsers would be available. We also
intend to provide portal users with other interaction
modalities, e.g., pen input and gesture recognition.
Moreover, we want to include in the portal engine
some tools that can facilitate the multimodal
interaction, e.g., an enhanced user profiling system
and an improved procedure for adapting contents
and interface to mobile devices. Finally, we are
planning to port all our work to the new released
Jetspeed 2 portal. Jetspeed 2 is compliant with JSR
(Java Specification Request) 168, a standard that has
enabled interoperability between portal servers and
portlets (JSR 168, 2003). In this way, most of our
work won’t be hooked on Jetspeed, but it will be
available to all portals that follow the JSR 168
specification.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work is partially supported by MIUR
(Ministero dell'Istruzione, dell'Università e della
Ricerca) through the FIRB WEB-MINDS project.
REFERENCES
UMTS Forum Home Page. Available from
http://www.umts-forum.org
Multimodal Interaction Activity Home Page. Available
from http://www.w3.org/2002/mmi/
EMMA Working Draft Home Page. Available from
http://www.w3.org/TR/emma/
X+V Specification. Available from
http://www.voicexml.org/specs/multimodal/x+v/12/
SALT Forum Home Page. Available from
http://www.saltforum.org/
Cohen, P. R.., 1992: The Role of Natural Language in a
Multimodal Interface. In Proc.of the 5
th
annual ACM
symposium on User interface software and technology
pp. 143-149, Monteray, California, United States.
Sharma, R., Pavlovic, V. I., Huang, T. S., 1998: Toward
Multimodal Human-Computer Interface. In Proc.
IEEE special issue on Multimedia Signal Processing,
86(5):853-859
Baber, C., Mellor, B., 2001: Using Critical Path Analysis
to Model Multimodal Human-Computer Interaction.
In Int. Journal Human-Computer Studies, 54, 613-636
Moran, D. B., Cheyer, A. J., Julia, L. E., Martin, D. L.,
Park, S., 1997: Multimodal User Interfaces in the
Open Agent Architecture. In Proc. of the 1997
International Conference on Intelligent User
Interfaces (IUI97), 61-68
Wahlster, W., Reithinger, N., Blocher, A., 2001:
SmartKom: Towards Multimodal Dialogues with
Anthropomorphic Interface Agents. In Proc. of
International Status Conference, Human Computer
Interaction, 23-34
Lisetti, C., Nasoz, F., LeRouge, C., Ozyer, O., Alvarez,
K., 2003: Developing Multimodal Intelligent Affective
Interfaces for Tele-Home Health Care. In Int. Journal
Human-Computer Studies, 59, 245-255
Bellik, Y., 1997: Multimodal Text Editor Interface
Including Speech for the Blind. In Speech
Communication, 23
Mari, M., Poggi, A., 2004: A Transcoding Based
Approach for Multi-Device Portal Contents
Adaptation. In Proc. WWW/Internet 2004 (IADIS
International Conference 2004), pp. 107-114, Madrid,
Spain
Dybkjaer, L., Bernsen, N. O., Minker, W., 2004:
Evaluation and Usability of Multimodal Spoken
Language Dialogue Systems. In Speech
Communication, 43, 33-54
Walker, M. A., Whittaker, S. J., Stent, A., Maloor, P.,
Moore, J., Johnston, M., Vasireddy, G., 2004:
Generation and Evaluation of User Tailored
Responses in Multimodal Dialogue. In Cognitive
Sciences, 28, 811-840
Apache Jetspeed 1 Home Page. Available from:
http://portals.apache.org/jetspeed-1/
I-Mode Home Page. Available from:
http://www.nttdocomo.com/corebiz/imode/index.html
FreeTTS Home Page. Available from:
http://freetts.sourceforge.net/docs/index.php
Flite Home Page. Available from:
http://www.speech.cs.cmu.edu/flite/
JSAPI Home Page. Available from:
http://java.sun.com/products/java-media/speech/
Apache Turbine Home Page. Available from:
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/
Apache Velocity Home Page. Available from:
http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
Opera Browser Home Page. Available from:
http://www.opera.com
Access NetFront Home Page. Available from:
http://www.access.co.jp/english/
OpenSALT Home Page. Available from:
http://hap.speech.cs.cmu.edu/salt/
JSR 168 Specification, 2003. Available from:
http://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=168
WEBIST 2006 - WEB INTERFACES AND APPLICATIONS
324