Thread Subject: video support language - final?
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: Karen Peltz Strauss
Date: Thu, Oct 18 2007 12:50 PM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: None
- Previous message in thread: None
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
Here is the language that I believe we agreed to today on video support.
1. Each agency must ensure the availability of communication access via point to point real-time video communications and video relay services for incoming and outgoing calls for individuals who need such access. This includes the requirement to provide a non-auditory means of alerting users of incoming calls.
2. Communication products or systems that are used to transmit video communications in real-time between and among individuals must
(a) support interoperability to permit communication between and among
users of terminals from different manufacturers and service providers;
(b) have a built-in non auditory alerting system or provide compatibility
with an external non-auditory alerting system that is capable of
alerting users of incoming calls; and
(c) at a minimum, support 15 frames per second, QCIF resolution,
and a latency of less than 400 milliseconds, in order to provide
sufficient quality and fluency that will support real time video
communication in which one or more parties are using sign language or
is talking in the picture.
3. Where security concerns are present, this subpart remains in effect, but may be achieved by measures that prevent an individual's video communications from intermingling with packets of the general government network, for example, through the installation of a separate line to an isolated communications terminal.
(1) The requirement to permit video communications in real-time includes the ability to send and receive video mail, much in the same way that voice telephone users are able to send and receive voice mail.
(2) Twenty frames per second or better is recommended to facilitate lip reading and fingerspelling in the video communications provided under this section.
(3) Explanatory information concerning sign language and lip-reading real-time conversation using low bit rate video communication can be found in ITU-T H-Series Supplement 1. http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H.Sup1/en.
(4) Non-auditory alerting for incoming video communications can be achieved via flashes, vibrations and sound; the preferred method will depend on the needs of the individual using the product.
----- Original Message -----
From: Brooner Mary-AMB004
To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; TEITAC Committee
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 9:59 AM
Subject: [teitac-telecom] Agenda for TELECOM WG call today at 1 pm
The agenda for Today's Telecom WG will be:
1. 2.2E: Volume Gain. A proposed text is attached.
2. 2.2B: Interference with Hearing Device. The text was voted and adopted on at the last in-person plenary. There is an outstanding request for an advisory note.
Proposed advisory note text:
Cellular and PCS handsets that meet a minimum of M3 or M4 and T3 or T4 measurement rating per ANSI C63.19 (2007) will meet this requirement for "lowest possible level." Devices in other frequency bands (700 MHz, AWS) are not yet included in this standard, but may be so at a later time. Digital wireline cordless devices that meet TIA-1083 will meet the "lowest possible level" standard for those types of devices.
3. Video Support. Text was sent out yesterday. There has been on-line traffic on the text overnight.
Mary Brooner/Brenda Battat
- Next message in Thread: None
- Previous message in Thread: None