2.9 Emergency calls: Support for Real-time text (RTT)

RealJoshue108 commented 3 years ago

Filed on behalf of John Paton RNIB (original email to RQTF list https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rqtf/2020Nov/0016.html)

For a while in the UK VoIP and ToIP were not considered valid ways of contacting emergency services since they didn't have the reliability of a POTS connection. We had to add a disclaimer stating that our soft textphone was not to be used (or relied on, I can't quite remember) for contacting emergency services. I take it that the requirement, or not, for a disclaimer in line with local laws is out of scope for this document?

RealJoshue108 commented 3 years ago

Interesting question @JWJPaton - lets discuss in RQTF.

RealJoshue108 commented 3 years ago

Discussed by RQTF on 9th Dec https://www.w3.org/2020/12/09-rqtf-minutes.html possibly out of scope for this document. However, @JWJPaton may draft some suggested text to include in final note

JWJPaton commented 3 years ago

I think my suggestion would be to add a requirement:

• REQ 11c: Provide appropriate and accurate messaging around the reliability of contacting emergency services via IP connections and whether alternative modes of communication are required.

And potentially a note below the section: Communications terminal providers should make themselves aware of local laws and mechanisms for connecting to emergency services to avoid false callouts.

A reliability disclaimer might be required for legal reasons but it is also a safety feature. If the note around potential laws is out of scope then the requirement still ensures people are not risking their safety on a service that cannot deliver.

w3c / raur

2.9 Emergency calls: Support for Real-time text (RTT) #26