- From: Gregory J. Rosmaita <unagi69@concentric.net>
- Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 15:07:04 -0400
- To: fred@eatel.net
- Cc: Authoring Tools Guidelines List <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
aloha, FRED! first of all, sorry for calling you frank -- i just suppose that i associate you, fred, with frankness... (whew! i think i wriggled out of that one gracefully!) fred wrote, quote: As far as I know, TTY requires both ends of the conversation to have one. Someone would have to type in on one end, and read back what the person wrote on the other. It would be doable on a teleconference, but unless someone volunteers to do this, it'll cost someone some money somewhere. Same thing with voice relay. unquote what differentiates that scenario from the necessity of having a translator at a face2face meeting? that's a default part of WAI registration forms, so it seems to me that if the WAI can make quote special unquote accommodations at F2F meetings, they should also be able to do so for teleconferences... i for one am not always at my computer when i call into a telecon, nor do i always have the capacity to get online -- this is an especially important consideration for those whose functional limitations precludes (at least at present) the use of a computer, or of a chat or IRC facility... therefore, i renew my call for either charles or one of the other ATAG editors to ping some deafness/hearing loss groups to ascertain the facts about TTY and relay systems, rather than let us speculate on that which we have little or no personal experience... fred then stated, quote An online chat eliminates the middle man, as it were. unquote what chat type facility cuts out the middle man, when you are forced to rely upon a middle man (in this case, adaptive technology) to interact with the chat facility... does the WAI/W3C have the resources to build an interoperable, accessible chat facility? fred also sagely observed, quote No system is perfect, and use of one over another inevitably discriminates against someone at some time. unquote agreed... fred also stated, quote My problem is F2F meetings. I can't travel, so I can't attend any of those. But they're only quarterly, so my non-attendance isn't a problem (I hope, anyway). unquote it is my understanding that no final resolutions are made at F2F meetings for the precise reason you outlined -- the inability of WG members to attend; what the face2face meeting provides is a different kind of forum for the intensive discussion of a set agenda; any resolutions arising from an F2F are posted to the list for all WG members to comment upon before they become finalized, so while you are missing out on an interesting facet of the WG dynamic by your inability to attend F2F meetings, as well as the opportunity to get to know one's fellow WG members on a less formal basis, you're not missing a chance to air your opinions on the topics being discussed at the F2F fred concluded with the proposition, quote In that vein, we might want to consider chat conferences instead of telephone as a once in awhile thing. Maybe one meeting a month, or every third meeting. Certainly no more than every other meeting, for the reason's Gregory has outlined. But I do think we should try it at least. unquote i'm certainly up to trying it, but only if it is conducted under the same constraints that bind F2F meetings, as there are documented accessibility problems that would confront current WG members if chat conferences were to be held, whereas there is (to my knowledge) currently no member of the WG who is precluded by a functional limitation from participating in a teleconference... i'm not advancing that as a reason for not investigating alternative means of communicating, but i think it far more practical for us to deal with concrete realities rather than theoretic contingencies... that being said, i do think it incumbent upon us to query deafness/hearing loss organizations to ascertain how their members participate in non-deafness/hearing loss related fora, so that, when we are fortunate enough to attract a member who is deaf or has a profound hearing loss, we will be able to accommodate them as soon as they join... and if that necessitates a transcriber, so be it -- that's what "reasonable accommodation" is all about... gregory. gregory. ------------------------------------------------------------------- CONSERVATIVE, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others. -- Ambrose Bierce, _The Devil's Dictionary_ ------------------------------------------------------------------- Gregory J. Rosmaita <unagi69@concentric.net> Camera Obscura: <http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/index.html> VICUG NYC: <http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/vicug/index.html> Read 'Em & Speak: <http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/books/index.html> -------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 20 September 2000 16:27:06 UTC