Thread Subject: Re: (Postpone the) Real-time text discussion
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: Gunnar Hellström
Date: Mon, Aug 13 2007 11:25 PM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: Paul E. Jones: "Re: (Postpone the) Real-time text discussion"
- Previous message in thread: Peter Korn: "Re: (Postpone the) Real-time text discussion"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
With "agreed among major telecom and IT providers", I was mainly referring
to creation of the international standards for the methods. They were
created in ITU SG 16 dealing with Multimedia Systems and Services, in IETF
AVT, MMUSIC and SIPPING groups, and then adopted in standards also by 3GPP
and ETSI. There have been good and intensive discussions and contributions
on the requirements to agree on, and the methods to use for their
implementation. You have participated as author and rapporteur in some of
these activities and seen the consensus creation around the standards.
That is for standards. I agree that for the broad deployment we are still at
the consensus building stage.
For deployment consensus, it is very good to have the base of consensus from
I had a convincing experience yesterday for the real-time text versus
messaging usability discussion. I got a call to my voice phone through a
text relay service that provides service in both real-time text and
messaging mode. In the introduction, the communication assistant added "the
text user is in chat mode, so this will be slow".
That is a very clear statement about the difference in usability from a
person working in the text communication environment, feeling a need to
prepare me and apologise for the slow performance.
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Paul E. Jones
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 12:36 AM
To: 'TEITAC Telecommunications Subcommittee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-telecom] (Postpone the) Real-time text discussion
> I think usable applications can be created based on your helper-
> application model, but I do not see any problems with the currently
> defined ways to do real-time text that would make it worth while
> abstaining from continuing on the current track and complementing with
> new ways as needs arise. The currently defined methods are agreed
> among major telecom and IT providers and are easily integrated with
> their environments.
I do not agree with the above statement. I spend my days (and many nights)
working on solutions for the telecom industry (both enterprise and service
provider), and I can say quite definitively that currently defined methods
are NOT agreed. If you are not under NDA, can you enumerate the list of
major carriers who have agreed to support any of the proposed RTT standards?
I'm not suggesting that anyone is unwilling, but I believe that the industry
is still at a point of building that consensus which you suggest already
- Next message in Thread: Paul E. Jones: "Re: (Postpone the) Real-time text discussion"
- Previous message in Thread: Peter Korn: "Re: (Postpone the) Real-time text discussion"