On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Kevin Smith <ke...@kismith.co.uk> wrote:
> I agree that it's undesirable in most scenarios to completely hide > useful features from the users. I agree that RTT is a useful tool. > > I only disagree with the need to mandate configuration behaviour in > the XEP - how features are exposed to the users is ultimately not > something we can dictate. > Fair from a spec perspective... ...There may be situations outside of the context of accessibility. XMPP is capable of things that original creators probably didn't think of -- including things like OCR servers (send image, get text), voice transcription on the web, security alarm systems, etc. That said, it's also important from a perspective because some government departments, i.e. (fcc.gov, access-board.gov, ada.gov) are currently updating policy documents, as well -- demonstrations of XEP-0301 was provided at FCC text-to-911 panel, and the Access Board is having a meeting with some key members in the real-time text group -- specifically surprising us with a request to look at the various technologies. Perhaps it does little damage of a few programs does not load an XEP-0301 plugin by default (A popular client, Pidgin, doesn't load the audio/video plugins by default, either), ....but it does a lot of damage to Accessibility if a large company lets through audio/video to "ring through", but blocks RTT until specifically turned on by going through several menus. I've already added one additional sentence to Section 5 of XEP-0301 to specifically discourage stopping advertising XEP-0301 (using 'SHOULD' normative) as the /main/ method of turning off or ending an RTT conversation Mark Rejhon
