On Sep 12, 2012, at 6:54 AM, Simon Pietro Romano <[email protected]> wrote:
> Coming to section 2.3 on Audio, I have already stated on this ML > (http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vmeet/current/msg00548.html) that I > strongly believe the priorities you identify in the document are not in the > right order. I cannot think of a 'future' RPS which is not capable of > reliably supporting audio from remote attendees (both those who have to give > presentations and those who just want to make sporadic comments). I know > this brings in some technical obstacles, but I nonetheless insist on this > point. > With respect to the specific requirements you identify: > > **Requirement 07-20**: The RPS MUST enable relay of messages from IM > to the mic to be able to happen as quickly as if the remote attendee > was local. > > > It is not clear to me what you mean by "as quickly as if the remote attendee > was local". > From a technical standpoint, this should translate in something similar to > what I was proposing in the already cited mail, i.e. a solution which > automatically announces a request for attention coming, via the jabber room, > from a remote: in a few words, if a remote writes a sentence in the chat and > lets it be preceded by the [mic] prefix, the RPS should automatically play a > predefined 'attention sound' inside the room. > > **Requirement 07-21**: The person relaying from IM to the mic must be > available throughout the WG meeting. To date, this has been done by > WG volunteers in the room. In the future, it could be done the same > way, or maybe could be facilitated by hiring people to attend > meetings for the specific purpose of being IM-to-mic scribes, > > > this part seems to be out of scope for the RPS > or maybe could be done with tools that allow copy-and-paste of text from > IM to a speech synthesizer that reads it to the room. There was consensus in the earlier discussion against what you "strongly believe". You might want to bring this up again in IETF Last Call. If there is consensus then that having remote attendees voice in the room, then there will also need to be a major reworking of the document, particularly the floor control parts (as you point out later in your message). --Paul Hoffman _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html. https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vmeet
