Editorial: Some instances of "bi-directional voice communication" are missing the word "continuous"

One or more instances of "bi-directional voice communication" are missing the word "continuous." This is most likely just an editorial mistake.

Most instances use the full term "continuous bi-directional voice communication", but without the word continuous, the RTT reqs unintentionally bring in scenarios like trading audio clips in turn-based text apps.

Related: "continuous conversational voice communication" was the term recommended by TR 103 708, but "conversational" was replaced with "bi-directional" in a later STF 614 decision.

Good observation.

There is another proposal discussed: "continuous real-time bidirectional communication" containing both continuous and real-time.

 I have always had problems seeing what "continuous" brings us, but now I see that it is meant to be both rapid as real-time when transmission occurs, and also that transmission takes place for every little change at the source of the media. The changes and additions are sent continuously.  

However, "real-time" has a very similar meaning: Here is an excerpt from ITU-T F.700

"2.1.2.1 Time aspects

The time aspects are described by two attributes: communication delay and time continuity. See Table 2. The communication delay may have four possible values:

– real-time, i.e. a fraction of a second; this applies for instance to a conversation, or to some video games where user actions have to show immediately on the screen;

. . ."

(For RTT, the term "continuous" is slightly misleading, because when no new text is entered, nothing is sent, so there will be pauses. Maybe that has been the source of my hesitance. The same can be done with voice communication. But I think that can be ignored, "continuous" is good)

So "continuous" in itself is intended to mean real-time plus "very often".

If this is commonly understood we could save space by omitting "real-time" and accept the initial proposal in this issue.

Anyway, real-time and continuous seem to be so close in meaning that it is not necessary to have them both.

For me both real-time and continuous are similar, but yet emphasize a slightly different aspect, and this is useful.

Still, I could be happy to remove real-time from the generic term "continuous real-time bidirectional communication" in order to have a general term that works in the context of all the media:

⦁ Continuous voice bidirectional communication

⦁ Continuous video bidirectional communication

⦁ Continuous RTT bidirectional communication

I concur. We should be consistent

I think it reads better though if we keep our current adjective order

⦁ Continuous bidirectional voice communication

⦁ Continuous bidirectional video communication

⦁ Continuous bidirectional RTT communication

however -- are we proposing to replace all instances of RTT with "Continuous bidirectional RTT communication" ? or some? which?

we should be clear about what we are proposing - so we can close this

Since we have " Continuous bidirectional voice communication" pretty consistently throughout -- I suggest -- that we identify each place where a) we should use that to replace something and b) each place where we are to replace something with the other two strings

Continuous has now been added in all places apart from in the EAA definition of total conversation. We are not allowed to change this one.

closed

added Included in EN label