I'm adding invocations using DialogFlow but I have two questions:
After adding the implicit invocations in DialogFlow do I need to resubmit for production (and review) from the Google Actions Console? I suspect I do but would appreciate confirmation.
How do I test implicit invocations before submitting for production? The actions simulator seems to require explicit invocations.
Check this out for implementing implicit invocation.
You may need to resubmit for review if there are changes to the functionality in the app.
You can test the app on the mobile device in the Alpha or Beta version and see how it works. Just use the phrases as you would have put in an intent to trigger implicit invocation and Assistant should suggest you to use your app.
Related
In order to build a Google Assistant app, Google provides two different APIs as part of their node.js actions-on-google library :
ActionsSdkApp
DialogflowApp
There have a common interface, but I don't understand what the difference is between the two and why I would use one or the other.
In short, these two objects provide similar (although not identical) methods to handle requests and provide results for two default ways Google allows you to build an Action for the Assistant.
The DialogflowApp object is the one you will likely use for most purposes. It is meant to work with the Dialogflow tool, letting it handle the Natural Language Processing (NLP) components and passing the results, where appropriate, to your webhook. It provides a few methods that are specific to Dialogflow features, such as Contexts, and maps other things to the response format that Dialogflow expects.
The ActionsSdkApp is meant to be used if you are using your own NLP and your webhook is getting things directly from Google (without using Dialogflow). If you need to build an actions.json file, you're using the Actions SDK.
Both have common methods and idioms, such as app.ask() and app.tell() and mapping app.data to session storage and so forth, even if the details of implementing these are different for each type.
You should be using the one that matches the tool that you're using. For most new users - that will likely be Dialogflow and the DialogflowApp object.
Update
Note that the API in the question, the specific objects asked about, and the specific methods talked about in my answer are for the previous version of the library.
The concept of when to use the ActionSDK vs Dialogflow objects in the current library still hold, so the concept behind this question and answer are still valid, but the technical details have changed.
Update - Jun 2020
The library in question is now deprecated, since it no longer works with the current version of Actions on Google (Actions Builder/SDK AoG v3). It still works with Dialogflow (which uses AoG v2) and if you're still using the AoG v2 Actions SDK.
IN SIMPLE TERMS
Use the Actions SDK for one-shot apps. These are apps that provide the required answer directly after being invoked and then stop. They give you just this one result. A typical example would be setting a timer to ten minutes.
Use the Dialogflow for all other apps, for those that are really conversational, where there are multiple paths to follow and where you want your user to provide more information during the conversation.
Looking at some of the sample code for hybrid mobile apps that speak to Node.js on BM (http://mbaas-gettingstarted.ng.bluemix.net/hybrid), you will see various examples that demonstrate how to use a logger on the client side:
var config = {
applicationId:'<applicationId>',
applicationRoute:'<applicationRoute>',
applicationSecret:'<applicationSecret>'
};
IBMBluemix.initialize(config).done(function(status){
// Initialize the Services
}).catch(function(err){
IBMBluemix.getLogger().error("Error intializing SDK");
});
I've confirmed this works fine in a Cordova app. My question is - why does this exist? As far as I can see, it does nothing more than wrap calls to console.log. It does not ever send logs to the Bluemix server app as far as I can tell.
There is documentation here, https://www.ng.bluemix.net/docs/starters/mobile/mobilecloud/nodejsmobile.html#log, that talks about the feature both server-side and client-side, but unless I'm missing it, there's no persistence for the client-side version.
If so - then what exactly is the point of this abstraction then? I have to imagine it was built for some reason, but I'm not seeing it.
this wrapper is used to "wrap" and to make "standard" the console log api, especially because this javascript API isn't available for all the browsers (especially old ones). By wrapping it the library could check the browser and its availability, in order to avoid an execution error
Another reasons is to wrap some configuration utilities, like providing different libraries to use (eg log4js) or other configuration, and so on.
Last but not least, probably it provide a singleton interface for performance optimization
Following the Book App example in play 2 for scala, I now have a basic working app.
What I want now is to add some features like
User registration
User authenetication to access some pages
What is the best way to do it in play for scala? Should I manage it by my own? is there a plugin for that?
Note: I'm the maintainer of Silhouette.
I can suggest you Silhouette which is a core only fork of Secure Social with the intention to built a more customizable, non-blocking and well tested implementation.
For the first stable version there are only two open issues which must be resolved. And these issues are only future requests. There are no API changes planed. The documentation must be improved and a sample application is started. The unit tests are also a good starting point.
If you plan to follow the authentication flow as stated by Secure Social then stick with it. It exists since more than two years and it is well tested by many companies. Otherwise take a look at Silhouette.
You have two options:
Secure Social (http://securesocial.ws/)
But it has unusual registration flow, where the user have to enter your email first, and receive link to registration form.
However, there is a pull request that address this issue (https://github.com/jaliss/securesocial/pull/260)
Play Authenticate
It doesn't support Scala out of the box. But there is a workaround created by me here: https://github.com/joscha/play-authenticate/issues/92
Both of them requires you to write the interface layer to database. An important drawback in both of them, is that you won't be able to make use of reactive database drivers like Reactive Mongo. they assume that you will return the results immediately, not a Future of the result.
There is a securesocial plugin (http://securesocial.ws). Covers most common authentication methods, has registration stuff. I found it very usefull.
The drawback is it's documentation. If you want to do something a bit differ from the simplest scenarios - be prepared to read through the source code.
I update my application from version 1.0 to version 1.1 and I submit my iPhone App to Apple a week ago .Few minutes ago I got this Report from Apple that
We found that your app uses one or more non-public APIs, which is not in compliance with the App Store Review Guidelines. The use of non-public APIs is not permissible because it can lead to a poor user experience should these APIs change.
We found the following non-public API/s in your app: setContentToHTMLString.
If you have defined methods in your source code with the same names as the above-mentioned APIs, we suggest altering your method names so that they no longer collide with Apple's private APIs to avoid your application being flagged in future submissions.
Additionally, one or more of the above-mentioned APIs may reside in a static library included with your application. If you do not have access to the library's source, you may be able to search the compiled binary using "strings" or "otool" command line tools. The "strings" tool can output a list of the methods that the library calls and "otool -ov" will output the Objective-C class structures and their defined methods.
These techniques can help you narrow down where the problematic code resides.
Please tell me, What to do to resolve it?
If you are using:
setContentToHTMLString
Don't use it anymore, if its a private API method and Apple doesn't want you to use it
If you are using a method in the private API, then you will have to find an alternative function. Either from a library or write your own.
If you have written a function named setContentToHTMLString then rename the function (you might like to prefix it- perhaps mySetContentToHTMLString) and change all of the usages over to your new name.
Then you'll be able to resubmit.
setContentToHTMLString is an undocumented method of UITextView. You may need to remove it. You are NOT allowed to access the private API.
I am working on an API that is triggered using a custom Job scheduler. The API is in the form of .NET dll. Currently it contains 10-15 methods. Most of the methods are currently in testing phase. The client wants to push out a single method to the production. Yes, I mean if there are 10 methods in a DLL the client wants to push a single method like FetchOrders(order id) into the production.
How can I go about doing that?
Publish that one method if it's tested and accepted.
Branch the version (when using TFS) in case work needs done on the prod version while working on the full version.
Make sure the other functions aren't available in production.