Re: Charter review (fwd)

There has been from time to time a possiblity of having one or more
particpants who are deaf or hard of hearing. The two options available are to
use a relay service, or for the working group to try out this method.

In the absence of such a requirement there are other reasons why it might be
good - the most obvious is complete logging, and the lack of noise on the
line (apart from our own chatter) may be helpful. on the other hand it
requires that we are all online at the right time, with a reasonable level of
connection and typing speed.

My inclination has therefore been to leave it there as an option, and if we
get some interest to try it.

Charles McCN

On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, William Loughborough wrote:

  At 11:43 AM 9/14/00 -0400, Fred Barnett wrote [in a vote for chats vs. 
  telecons]:
  >No more telephone noise or other problems.
  
  WL: I fear this is a little naive. Chat rooms are quite "noisy" in some 
  non-audio sense and as to "other problems" - the grass may seem greener on 
  the other side, but if previous experiences with the "medium" of chat rooms 
  is any indication, they are pretty high on the "worthless, frustrating" 
  list - at least for a certain old geezer. Of course if this is a decidedly 
  minority view the effort will be made and I'll do my best to take part, but 
  I'd rather depend on sending email back and forth! There's probably some 
  idealized video conferencing hookup with full VR accompaniment, but for the 
  moment...
  
  
  --
  Love.
                   ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
  

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile    mailto:charles@w3.org    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia
September - November 2000: 
W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France

Received on Thursday, 14 September 2000 12:36:57 UTC