Thread Subject: Re: real-time text

Note

This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.

From: jagbell
Date: Wed, Jun 20 2007 4:15 PM

Please note my new address is = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = .

Thanks,

Janice

On Jun 20, 2007, at 2:38 PM, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:

> What you would receive is exactly the same as what you receive on TTYs
> today.
>
> All corrections are in place. You can see people backspace - that
> is true.
> But only if person sending wants to. That person has the option of
> holding
> text back if they wish. It wouldn't be real-time text in that
> case. but
> the requirement is only that devices be capable of real-time text.
> it does
> not require people to use real-time text.
>
> As Jim pointed out - they may wish to operate in IM mode, in
> message mode.
> Or send email. Just as all of us with real-time voice also use
> all of
> these other modes sometimes and want real-time communication at
> other times.
>
>
>
> Gregg
> -- ------------------------------
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Tom
>> Brett
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 1:08 PM
>> To: 'TEITAC Telecommunications Subcommittee'
>> Subject: Re: [teitac-telecom] real-time text
>>
>> The t140 includes this option but I what I receive is
>>
>> Ga ood morning, I s am wrting writing you....
>>
>>
>>
>> Tom Brett
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
>> Gregg Vanderheiden
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 1:27 PM
>> To: 'TEITAC Telecommunications Subcommittee'
>> Subject: Re: [teitac-telecom] real-time text
>>
>> Hi Tom
>>
>> T140 includes backspaces so you still get a corrected message
>> at the far end.
>>
>> And you can always have an option to hold back text if you
>> wish. That is,
>> a system with real-time text could ALSO have a mode that was
>> message like.
>>
>>
>> Gregg
>> -- ------------------------------
>> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> [mailto:teitac-telecom-
>>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Tom Brett
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 7:38 AM
>>> To: 'TEITAC Telecommunications Subcommittee'
>>> Subject: Re: [teitac-telecom] real-time text
>>>
>>>>> 1. Although the characters are to be transmitted
>> quickly, there is
>>>>> no
>>> reference to how they are handled once they're transmitted.
>> That is,
>>> a server in the middle somewhere could add significant delays by
>>> design or congestion. If we want to make text conversation
>> real-time,
>>> we have to make it clear what the permissible end-to-end delay is.
>>>
>>>> From my understanding of the real time text definition I
>> thought that
>>>> it
>>> applied only to the device that was doing the output.
>> There can be
>>> significant delay in the receipt of the characters depending upon
>>> receiving device or traffic on the transmission lines. The
>> end to end
>>> delay is, I think, beyond the control of the subcommittee
>> because the
>>> transmission is either via the internet or telephone lines.
>>>
>>>>> 3. Most importantly, I don't understand why we would want
>> to exclude
>>>>> the
>>> huge mainstream advantages of chat and IM. I have not
>> heard anything
>>> from the many deaf users of these systems that the "Enter"
>> key imposes
>>> a conversational barrier. Moreover, it is unlikely that mainstream
>>> chat/IM program vendors will modify their programs to transmit
>>> character by character. This leaves deaf and other users
>> still in a
>>> communication ghetto, instead of being able to use the same tools
>>> everyone else is
>> using.
>>>
>>> As a user of text communication tools that include chat/im I do not
>>> find this to be a barrier. In many respects I find this to be
>>> superior to character by character transmission....we all make
>>> typos...imagine receiving a character by character message:
>>>
>>> "Gaood xxx good mraning, I qaxxx am wriging you today..."
>>>
>>> This becomes very confusing. I find it better to receive a
>> complete
>>> message with fewer typos that I can then decipher easier.
>>>
>>> Tom Brett
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Jim
>>> Tobias
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 8:21 AM
>>> To: 'TEITAC Telecommunications Subcommittee'
>>> Subject: [teitac-telecom] real-time text
>>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> As drafted on our call monday, the definition of real-time text is:
>>>
>>> "Communications that employ the transmission of text wherein the
>>> characters are transmitted by a terminal w/in a maximum of
>> 1 sec. of
>>> character input."
>>>
>>> I think there are a few problems here:
>>>
>>> 1. Although the characters are to be transmitted quickly,
>> there is no
>>> reference to how they are handled once they're transmitted.
>> That is,
>>> a server in the middle somewhere could add significant delays by
>>> design or congestion. If we want to make text conversation
>> real-time,
>>> we have to make it clear what the permissable end-to-end delay is.
>>>
>>> 2. If the intention in this definition was to distinguish TTY-style
>>> (characters are transmitted as soon as they are keyed in)
>> from IM and
>> chat,
>>> where you type a bunch of characters and then press "Enter" to
>>> transmit, we should say so explicitly, somewhere.
>>>
>>> 3. Most importantly, I don't understand why we would want
>> to exclude
>>> the huge mainstream advantages of chat and IM. I have not heard
>>> anything from the many deaf users of these systems that the "Enter"
>>> key imposes a conversational barrier. Moreover, it is
>> unlikely that
>>> mainstream chat/IM program vendors will modify their programs to
>>> transmit character by character. This leaves deaf and other users
>>> still in a communication ghetto, instead of being able to
>> use the same
>>> tools everyone else is
>> using.
>>>
>>> ******
>>> Jim Tobias
>>> Inclusive Technologies
>>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>> +1 732.441.0831 voice/tty
>>> skype jimtobias
>>> +1 908.907.2387 mobile
>>>
>>>

WebAIM is an initiative of:
Center for Persons with Disabilities (CPD) Utah State University