Re: [avt] Use of redundancy in rfc2793bis text transmission

On 16 Apr 2004, at 09:51, Gunnar Hellstrom wrote:
> The case with a user pasting in large amounts of text into a 
> conversational
> system is not occurring in reality. If you cut and paste something, it 
> is a
> short piece, like an address or so. Users haver much more efficient 
> means
> to transmit documents, so text conversation is not used for that
> application. It was technician?s thought that made the wording come 
> into
> rfc2793bis.
>
>
> I suggest changing that section in chapter 1 to the following:
>
>
> "The text is supposed to be entered by human users from a keyboard,
> handwriting recognition, voice recognition or any other input method.  
> The
> rate of character entry is usually at a level of a few characters per
> second or less. In general, only one or a few new characters are 
> expected
> to be transmitted with each packet. Small blocks of text may be 
> prepared by
> the user and pasted into the user interface for transmission during the
> conversation, occasionally causing some packets to carry more payload."

I would suggest you also add wording like "Automated systems MUST NOT 
use this format to send large amount of text at a rate significantly 
above that which a human user could enter".

Colin

_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
avt@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt

Re: [avt] Use of redundancy in rfc2793bis text transmission - optimizing interoperability