Subject: [Sipping] Re: manyfolks-sipping-ToIP-01

From: "Guido Gybels" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 09:44:10 +0000 GMT

Eric,

<<However, if we said minimum of 30cps, but really like 60cps
(professional typist), that is a ptime of 16ms, which would start to strain many networks.>>

I am not sure, but I think that even a palantypist will not manage 60cps, and when memory serves me right, I believe I suggested 30cps on the basis of it being already an upper limit in terms of maximum possible typing speed. James Hamlin might have some more background with regard to the number.

<<Why do we say that the file format for storage should be XHTML?  Are we archiving marked-up text?  Why not just UTF-8?>>

As I was the one who put this requirement in, I should probably answer it :o)

Decent interactive texting services will mark up text, for instance to show the two parties in two different colours. Further text formatting is often used to further improve the user experience.

We know from extensive discussions with deaf users that the need to be able to store or archive conversations is quite important. This archiving is intended primarily for the purpose of allowing the end user to recall on screen or print out previous conversations. That in turn means that the formatting should be retained.

Because of this need to retain formatting, it makes sense to mark up the text, which will allow formatting by rendering devices based on the metadata from the mark-up.

Since interactive texting is meant to be available on all kinds of platforms and devices, I thought it crucial to make sure that the storage format was at least device and platform independent as well. We have seen in the past all kinds of formats being used, which hampers often the users ability to copy the files to other devices etc.

Of course, to mandate xhtml markup does not prevent application developers and device manufacturers from implementing additional formats.

I hope that is a sufficient explanation for this requirement.

Best wishes,

Guido

Guido Gybels
Director of New Technologies

RNID, 19-23 Featherstone Street
London EC1Y 8SL, UK
Tel +44(0)20-7294 3713
Fax +44(0)20-7296 8069

_______________________________________________
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: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 18:45:22 +0100

I think the XML storage format sounds interesting.
In our applications, we have so far just made a homemade text format
replicating the two sides of the (person-to-person) call. It can be ok for
reviewing, but not good if you want to cut out a piece and reuse it in a
document.

So, who want to start defining an XML storage formnat.

When doing it, it might be good to look at the timed text activity in IETF
avt, and the XCON activity in xcon, to check for interelations.

Colours and other rendering effects are defined in T.140 to be as defined in
ISO6429. - As also specified in Unicode-ISO10646 that we use.

Gunnar

-------------------------------------------
Gunnar Hellström
Omnitor AB
Renathvägen 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
Guido Gybels
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2004 10:44 AM
To: Gunnar Hellstrom; [email-masked]; Eric Burger;
[email-masked]; Sipping (E-mail)
Subject: [Sipping] Re: manyfolks-sipping-ToIP-01

Eric,

<<However, if we said minimum of 30cps, but really like 60cps
(professional typist), that is a ptime of 16ms, which would start to strain
many networks.>>

I am not sure, but I think that even a palantypist will not manage 60cps,
and when memory serves me right, I believe I suggested 30cps on the basis of
it being already an upper limit in terms of maximum possible typing speed.
James Hamlin might have some more background with regard to the number.

<<Why do we say that the file format for storage should be XHTML?  Are we
archiving marked-up text?  Why not just UTF-8?>>

As I was the one who put this requirement in, I should probably answer it
:o)

Decent interactive texting services will mark up text, for instance to show
the two parties in two different colours. Further text formatting is often
used to further improve the user experience.

We know from extensive discussions with deaf users that the need to be able
to store or archive conversations is quite important. This archiving is
intended primarily for the purpose of allowing the end user to recall on
screen or print out previous conversations. That in turn means that the
formatting should be retained.

Because of this need to retain formatting, it makes sense to mark up the
text, which will allow formatting by rendering devices based on the metadata
from the mark-up.

Since interactive texting is meant to be available on all kinds of platforms
and devices, I thought it crucial to make sure that the storage format was
at least device and platform independent as well. We have seen in the past
all kinds of formats being used, which hampers often the users ability to
copy the files to other devices etc.

Of course, to mandate xhtml markup does not prevent application developers
and device manufacturers from implementing additional formats.

Best wishes,

Guido

Guido Gybels