Subject: [Sipping] caller's language preference

From: Juha Heinanen <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 13:45:27 +0200

is there a way for the caller to tell, which language it prefers the
callee to use when it answers the call?  for example, the callee can be
an announcement or ivr server.

i checked draft-ietf-sip-callerprefs and it seems to use contact
parameters/accept-contact header for similar, but not quite the same
purpose.

in the application i described in above, there is only one contact
registered and the proxy plays no role in the game.

-- juha

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP

---

From: "Gunnar Hellstrom" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 21:59:00 +0100

Juha,
We are just discussing very similar topics in the toip (text over IP ) list, where I
entered this comment:
-----------------------------------------
Yes, Language can be used in the Accept header for acceptance or refusal of invites with
specific languages. ( though, it seems that that is the language of the information about
the session, but I am not sure on that conclusion. )

More advanced, we can use the language and media feature tags in the preferences and
capabilities negotiation framework. I think that for many of the service invocation
requirements expressed in RFC 3351, we can describe how they can be achieved by applying
the existing framework of preferences and capability negotiation.

There is a whole structure of preference and capability negotiation mechanisms available,
and we need to  recommend a subset of them for invocation of services of interest for
accessibility purposes.

It seems that the following rfc:s are central to the mechanisms: 3841 3840 2703 2538 2533
2506. And of course SIP rfc 3261 itself.
-------------------------------------
It is draft-ietf-sipping-toip-00 and its refinement that we are discussing. Part of the
problem we are working on is to discover when users have disparate language or media
preferences or capabilities and then invoke translation services.

This is not an answer on your question. But it is an indication that it is important that
similar usage habits are developed for the quite rich set of already standardised
mechanisms.

Part of the scope for sipping-toip is to find when there is a need for conversion between
speech and real time text or sign language, but for all the three media of audio, text and
video, the language tag is a valid extra piece of information that influences the service
invocation.

Can we start structuring the problem and give good valid examples and recommendations for
what mechanism to use for the different cases?

1. Where does a caller express preferences and capabilities for language and media?

2. Where does a callee express preferences and capabilities for language and media?

3. How is the level of acceptance for deviations from the preferences expressed?
( E.g. "I prefer to communicate in French, but can accept English for short and simple
calls." )

4. Where does a service express offered capabilities for language and media?

5. How can rules for call setup be implemented to be based on matching preferences and
capabilities?

6. How can routing and service invocation be included in the model.

7. How does preferences and capabilities expressed at registration interrelate with
similar functions in Invite?

8. In what groups and documents do we establish such harmonised usage habits for the
mechanisms?

9. Will the concept of routing and service invocation based on matching preferences and
capabilities be managable by human users? Will they understand and remember to influence
the settings so that the intended convenience is achieved? Or will it have the opposite
effect: "Oh, complicated service, why is an expensive Japanese interpreter included in the
call when we manage our conversation in Spanish very well both of us? Ah, I forgot to
reset the phone after getting it back yesterday."

Gunnar
-------------------------------------------
Gunnar Hellstrom
Omnitor AB
Renathvagen 2
SE 121 37 Johanneshov
SWEDEN
+46 8 556 002 03
Mob: +46 708 204 288
www.omnitor.se
[email-masked]
--------------------------------------------

>-----Original Message-----
>From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On
>Behalf Of Juha Heinanen
>Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 12:45 PM
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: [Sipping] caller's language preference
>
>
>

---

From: "James M. Polk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:33:48 -0600

Juha

What about the "Accept-Language" header (section 20.3 of 3261)?

>registered and the proxy plays no role in the game.

cheers,
James

                                *******************
                 Truth is not to be argued... it is to be presented

---

From: Juha Heinanen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 09:46:38 +0200

> What about the "Accept-Language" header (section 20.3 of 3261)?

i guess that it is closest to what i want, but currently the text only
covers the language used in signaling.

-- juha