On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Kevin Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> > QUESTIONS as follows: > > 1. Are there other scenarios that XEP-0301 implementors want to see "made > > possible", not currently possible with the current protocol? > > I know the 'disable RTT completely' option isn't popular, but I do > think that if a user wants to never receive RTT (and I do think that's > a valid user choice, especially if they're paying for bandwidth or > whatever) that removing RTT from caps is the way to signal this, and > it's worth calling this out. I know I can't prevent the implementor from doing this (If so, I'd prefer them make it an opt-out Preferences/Options setting). There are special consideration arises from this, as follows: Turning RTT off prevents incoming <rtt/> from even being signalled at all. .......That's equivalent to blanket blocking on all incoming deaf callers. Accessibility situations would prefer that vendors display "*Incoming Real-Time Text Detected & Rejected*." .......That's equivalent to putting the phone into voicemail mode. You're still at least *notified* of an attempt to reach you interactively. Also, if it becomes a default software installation setting, then very few people can initiate at all, because everybody else probably has RTT completely turned off by default. A best-practice would be an opt-out Preferences/Option setting: Give the user the choice to turn it off completely. Please, don't put a default call-block on all incoming deaf callers, some of whom currently have no way of doing an interactive-mode conversation online (only line-by-line, or doing video if they want to do sign language) I realize this is not a protocol issue, but consequently, this practice would be strongly discouraged. Thanks Mark Rejhon
