On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Edward Tie <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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. >> > > Yes, but Mark say that users can switch off or on to option RTT. He have > build a button (Fast Text) when he want to protect own privacy. it's simple > solution for him. > That's correct. You have a feature that activates it, and the user is informed. XEP-0301 activated via a button, or menu. ...Also, it can be turned off by default in mainstream applications (although Section 5 of XEP-0301 should still be complied with: signalling the existence of XEP-0301 implementation) ...It is possible, in 10 years, marketing certain entities hopefully makes it a familiar concept (even if only 5%-10% of people use it), so people are no longer confused. To me, real-time text is a very long term plan. Perhaps it is not ideal to combine audio/video automatically with RTT, via one button (for now) in *mainstream* applications (i.e. applications not targeted specifically for the deaf market) to automatically enable all 3 systems (audio/video/RTT). However, it's needs to be accomplished in assistive-targeted applications communicating to other assistive-targeted, too. ...There is an icon graphic for the International Symbol for real-time text at www.fasttext.org which can be used as the icon for the button. On the same fasttext.org document, are example phrases that can be used in the user interface to conveniently warn the user that real-time text is enabled. In fact, you see the text "Fast Text mode accepted" I've added to the middle of the animation at: www.realjabber.org/anim/facebook_chat_concept.gif<http://www.realjabber.org/> which would signal that both ends have agreed to establish real-time text. Tooltips, popups, help pages, confirmation messages, can be carefully worded (especially on first-ever initiation) to educate the user of real-time text. ...I also agree that real-time text can be useful in the mainstream! It combines the advantages of text messaging, with the real-time interactivity of conversation. Say, you don't want to do audio/video, or need to be quiet/discreet, but urgently need real-time conversation -- you initiate a real-time text call. It's a big potential marketing point of RTT, even if turned on only 5% or 10% of the time (which may still make it more popular than video in ten years!) Thanks Mark Rejhon
