On 06/29/2012 04:00 PM, Edward Tie wrote: Hi,
> If you talk but you think what you have talk wrong..and you hear what > you say.. It will be same for deaf peoples. First: I don't think we should regard RTT as an accessibility thing or a 'deaf spec'. In the context of online counselling for example there has been quite a bit of discussion about the use of RTT. Secondly, the way we process a spoken conversation is fundamentally different from the way we process a written conversation. When we are talking, only very few people are able to recall word for word what the other has said. While listening we interpret what we hear and we memorize our interpretation, not the words. While speaking we use that mechanism to correct what we have said. People often start saying something totally different then where they end with. With written text, once send, the text is literally black on white in front of the receiver. With RTT there is no way to mask a change of mind while writing and less opportunity to undo what was written. If I have to compare RTT to some analogy of spoken text, then it is like recording a spoken conversation and replaying and analysing every mistake before answering. I don't say RTT is good or bad, useful or useless. But I oppose to the assumption that RTT is a minor privacy intrusion compared to an audio or video chat. It is a different kind of privacy intrusion and should be treated like that. Winfried
