Adding a 6.2.5: Editing RTT input (from clause 13.4.11 of TR 103 708)

Proposal to add:

6.2.5 Editing RTT input

Where ICT has RTT capabilities, and supports RTT user input,
the RTT user interface shall provide the participant with functionality to provide new input and to edit text by erasure from the end, without being limited by any new line or other delimiter in the earlier text.

NOTE: "Functionality to edit text" applies to manual correction and automatic correction mechanisms such as automatic spelling correction.

The results of these proposed changes can be previewed in Annex A of TR 103 708 ( tr_103708v010101p.pdf tr_103708v010101p.docx).

added RTT label

marked this issue as related to #56 (closed)

changed title from Adding a 6.2.5 Revising RTT (from clause 13.4.11 of TR 103 708) to Adding a 6.2.5: Revising RTT (from clause 13.4.11 of TR 103 708)

changed the description

From Loïc:

Replace "revise" with "edit" (a more commonly understood term when referring to text editing tasks).

Changes agreed at 10/01/2024 STF614 meeting.

changed title from Adding a 6.2.5: Revising RTT (from clause 13.4.11 of TR 103 708) to Adding a 6.2.5: Editing RTT input (from clause 13.4.11 of TR 103 708)

changed the description

changed the description

Changes proposed at the 10/01/2024 STF614 Meeting incorporated.

changed the description

changed the description

I've made a minor editorial change, removing the upper case for "New Line", as I don't think that it is necessary.

Good, but

1. "participant" is a rare word in the EN, (just two other occurrences) and it does not seem motivated to use it here. Either delete "the participant with" or replace "participant" with "user". I suggest to delete, making the sentence be:

"Where ICT has RTT capabilities, and supports RTT user input,
the RTT user interface shall provide functionality to provide new input and to edit text by erasure from the end, without being limited by any new Line or other delimiter in the earlier text."

For consistency, it could be good to also change the occurence in 6.2.2.3 to "users", while the use in the definition of turn taking should stay.

2. "New Line" is a term that shall be capitalised for both words.

Note that we cannot use capitalisation for any special significance, since it will be lost in some translations (e.g. German, Chinese).

How about using "newline character" instead of "new line" or "New Line"? This way of writing is common in programming, at least. See for example https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/i/7.4?topic=support-newline-character

Combining Gunnar and Pär's latest contributions, this would leave us with a nice simple formulation:

"Where ICT has RTT capabilities, and supports RTT user input,
the RTT user interface shall provide functionality to provide new input and to edit text by erasure from the end, without being limited by any newline character or other delimiter in the earlier text."

Yes, "newline" is better than "New Line", and is used in Wikipedia. But it seems to usually mean the CR LF or just LF characters, while the prevailing standard T.140 for RTT prefers use of the Unicode character Line Separator (U+2028) for the concept of causing a start of a new line in a way that is acceptable for all writing directions. (CR LF is also accepted by T.140 but not recommended). Can we consider "any newline character" to be general enough to mainly mean Line Separator, but also other line separators, or should we use "any line separator", or any other term that is a general name for separating lines?

Gunnar's last proposal now leads to the following revised proposal:

6.2.5 Editing RTT input

Where ICT has RTT capabilities, and supports RTT user input,
the RTT user interface shall provide functionality to provide new input and to edit text by erasure from the end, without being limited by any line separator or other delimiter in the earlier text.