Re: [Tools-discuss] Meetecho misfeatures and a problem they can't fix.

[Meetecho IETF support <[e-mail]>]

Hi John,

Il 17/11/20 11:47, John C Klensin ha scritto:
> Hi.
> 
> I want to apologize in advance for the likely tone of this note.
> I'm tired, I just had to participate in a meeting that should
> have been cancelled, I have a paper for IGF that I need to
> revise before I present it in a few hours, and I'm generally in
> an impatient and foul mood.
> 
> (1) Meetecho needs to be much more careful about assumptions
> about screen geometry.  I'm sitting on front of two monitors,
> one 27 inch class, the other 24 inch class and with slightly
> different aspect ratios and, because of some eyesight issues
> (see below) they are operating at different magnification levels
> with the smaller monitor operating at higher magnification.
> When Meetecho is started in Chrome (which, for all I know, is
> part of the problem) on the smaller monitor, the frame pops up
> to "allow" me to test my equipment, the tests work fine, but
> then there is no way to dismiss that frame, making it impossible
> to actually join a session.   The button to continue with the
> session is at the bottom of the frame and the bottom of the
> frame is offscreen.  The frame cannot be scrolled, resized, or
> moved (either within the Meetecho window or elsewhere), so no
> button.

Actually that frame should be scrollable. The weird thing might be that 
the scroll bar appears on the right hand side of the page rather than of 
the frame itself, so it's probably easy to miss. Will fix that.

> Now, because of greater than 100% magnification (and that not
> working terribly well in Windows), Windows not dealing with
> screens with different properties and geometry exceptional well,
> and possibly  browser issues (I have no way to know without a
> lot of testing that isn't going to happen this week), I admit
> that my environment is hostile to any "normal" assumptions about
> screen layouts and geometry.  However, Meetecho ought to be more
> robust against such things, especially if neither it nor the
> IETF are going to have an eyesight quality requirement for
> participation.  If that frame could be moved or resized (ideally
> both) there would be no problem.  If it could be closed by the
> usual "X" icon in the upper right corner as well as the button
> at the bottom, no problem.  But, as it is, unusable in that part
> of my environment (this works fine in Firefox on my bigger
> screen).

Adding the possibility to close it via the usual "X" button is trivial. 
Noted.

> (2) At IETF 108, there was considerable confusion (and wasted
> time) because it wasn't clear whether the chair giving someone
> the virtual floor unmuted video and/or audio.  This time,
> whether I like the solution or not, the confusion is eliminated
> and people have to unmute themselves, audio and video
> separately.  However, the buttons to do that are quite small,
> even on my large screens, and close to buttons that do other
> things.  Moreover, it is still hard enough to tell whether one
> is muted or not and so muting when one intends to unmute was a
> common occurrence in the last WG I was in (not just me).  This
> needs to stop.  Those two icons (and the "place in queue" one,
> which has similar issues) need to be large enough that someone
> with mild to medium vision difficulties can find and interpret
> them.  They need to clearly indicate (in non-subtle ways)
> whether video or audio are on or off.  Ideally there should be a
> mechanism to turn both on and off together.  And they need to be
> separated enough from other icons that someone using a
> touchscreen with fat fingers doesn't get the wrong one or more
> than one (not my issue, but an obvious one).

Again, thanks for the feedback. We'll take all this into account for the 
next release.

Best,
Alessandro

> (3) With the understanding that my vision is worse in the wee
> hours of my morning than during more normal working times, the
> combination of Meetecho's screen layout and presenter choices
> about how much information to put on a slide, type styles and
> sizes, etc., can easily make the content of slides unreadable
> (more easily for me than others, perhaps).  The IETF's
> traditional solution to that problem has been to insist that
> slides be posted well in advance of meetings (days, not hours)
> so that those who might have problems seeing them onscreen can
> download them and make them available in other ways.  That rule
> has apparently been abandoned.   Neither Meetecho nor any other
> online meeting technology I can think of can solve those
> problems.  But, if the IESG cannot be convinced to go back to
> enforcing the prior availability rule -- "no posted slides
> either no slides in the presentation or no presentation" and "no
> chair slides posted before the meeting, no meeting", maybe the
> tools team should be considering a semi-mandatory application to
> check slides for plausible visibility of text.  Even if there
> were no other reasons for getting things posted well in advance,
> consider this a request to make reasonable accommodations for
> those of us who are somewhat to significantly vision-impaired.
> 
>     john
> 
> ___________________________________________________________
> Tools-discuss mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss
> 
> Please report datatracker.ietf.org and mailarchive.ietf.org
> bugs at http://tools.ietf.org/tools/ietfdb
> or send email to [e-mail]
> 
> Please report tools.ietf.org bugs at
> http://tools.ietf.org/tools/issues
> or send email to [e-mail]
>