- From: rhiaro <amy@rhiaro.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 21:06:23 +0200
- To: public-credentials@w3.org
Also the Zoom transcript shows up a little after the call, not live during it, so it wouldn't let people read along [and interject via text if desired] as the call took place (which our currently scribing does). On 18.11.19. 20:59, rhiaro wrote: > If the Zoom automatic transcript works it'll put the scribes out of a job!! > > Seriously, is it good? Would it work well with all the jargon and > different accents on the calls? But I can't imagine it would be very > accurate, that seems way too futuristic.. And in my experience > correcting a slightly off transcript takes as long as just transcribing > it from scratch, but perhaps zoom has better tools. I suspect what would > happen is everyone would assume the transcript is fine without checking > it, until at some point in the future we have to go back and confirm > what someone said. Additional overhead would be adding in > proposals/resolutions, and segmenting by topic headings. > > In answer to the question Stephen, the audio is transcribed in IRC in > real-time by a human (the scribe) with varying amounts of accuracy > depending on how fast different people type. > > Amy > > On 18.11.19. 20:47, Stephen Curran wrote: >> Thanks again, Manu. >> >>> hope my response wasn't taken as me thinking it was a "dumb" question >>> (re-reading my semi-ranty response, I can see how one may have come to >>> that conclusion)... If I did, I apologize, that was not my intent. >> Definitely fine. I was serious about putting that information into a >> FAQ so the next person asking (there will be more...) can be directed >> to that. >> >> IRC - the list of features you mentioned are not compelling to me as >> other than tradeoffs (vs. showstoppers). Thanks to Amy though for >> mentioning what I thought may be the case - IRC is used between >> meetings not just within meetings. I thought that might be the case. >> Consolidating on a single chat system is as hard as ever in the >> current landscape. The other specific question I had is whether IRC >> (or something) is doing real-time call transcription? >> >>> I personally don't >>> think there is a big barrier to joining the calls (you can use a phone, >>> you can use the Web, you can use a native client... we support it all, >>> but the SIP clients kinda suck... onsip is great, but maybe people have >>> issues with that one as well?). >> I'll reread the guidance on how to join. Last I checked it was phone >> and SIP only for audio. >> >> From Brent: >>> Zoom chat only exists for the duration of the calls and I wouldn't >> recommend using it as the place to scribe or queue. >>> My preferred setup would be Zoom for audiovisual and IRC for notes, >> queuing, and conversation. >> >> When you record a Zoom call, you get the chat record as well, so it >> does last longer, if you choose to use it. The challenge with >> combining multiple systems in a single call is that the transcription >> would not know who is talking, which is pretty important. >> >> Thanks for the feedback. >> >> On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 8:53 AM Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com >> <mailto:msporny@digitalbazaar.com>> wrote: >> >> On 11/17/19 12:46 PM, Stephen Curran wrote: >> > Interesting arguments, and the accessibility is the one that >> > resonates. Thanks for taking the time to send them. I'm hoping that >> > you take that email and put it in a document for others dumb enough >> > to start this conversation again. >> >> I hope my response wasn't taken as me thinking it was a "dumb" >> question >> (re-reading my semi-ranty response, I can see how one may have come to >> that conclusion)... If I did, I apologize, that was not my intent. >> >> It's a good question, and one where people want to do something about >> it. We're at the point where someone actually has to do the work, and >> that person that does the work should be aware that the system has >> more >> requirements that may appear at first blush. >> >> > If you do, please add what it is that IRC brings to this vs. any >> > other in-conference chat system (like the one in Zoom, for example). >> >> Queue management, everyone being able to control the voice system, >> systems control (aside from queue, audio... publication of minutes, >> etc.)... accessibility (IRC has lots of clients, a number of them w/ >> decent accessibility... allowing someone that's blind/deaf to control >> all parts of the call). I'm in a rush typing this out, there are other >> things, but they escape me in my haste. >> >> > I don't see that the "missing" features listed are actual >> > requirements but rather as ways to keep things working as they have >> > in the good old days. >> >> Well, things work the way they do because they've evolved over the >> past >> 20+ years to meet everyone's needs. That said... >> >> > No response needed, we've both made our points. While I would love >> > to see a change, I'm good to end this discussion on a "we disagree" >> > basis. >> >> I don't think we disagree as much as you might think. I personally >> don't >> think there is a big barrier to joining the calls (you can use a >> phone, >> you can use the Web, you can use a native client... we support it all, >> but the SIP clients kinda suck... onsip is great, but maybe people >> have >> issues with that one as well?). >> >> I'd like to see us try to get Zoom working as an option (for audio >> bridge only) since people seem to like it. The screen sharing stuff >> concerns me, but that's manageable if we require all presentations >> to be >> sent out in accessible forms or for presenters to be aware that not >> everyone can see the screen. Moving away from IRC concerns me, because >> of the special privileges, vendor lock in, and cost associated with >> running Zoom rooms and taking minutes. All of this is work, and >> something I can volunteer our folks to do... but if there is an >> enterprising individual in this group that would like to tackle >> Zoom, by >> all means, go at it, just please be sure to take heed of the previous >> requirements... if you don't, people will complain (and some of them >> will have really good reasons for complaining). >> >> -- manu >> >> PS: The irony here is that W3C uses WebEx for WG meetings, a mostly >> proprietary system, for their WG calls... the plan was for it to be >> temporary... but now it doesn't seem like it's going to be temporary. >> >> -- >> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny) >> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. >> blog: Veres One Decentralized Identifier Blockchain Launches >> https://tinyurl.com/veres-one-launches >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Stephen Curran >> Principal, Cloud Compass Computing, Inc. (C3I) >> Technical Governance Board Member - Sovrin Foundation (sovrin.org) >> >> /Schedule a Meeting: //https://calendly.com/swcurran/ >> >
Received on Monday, 18 November 2019 19:06:35 UTC