SL = Signing language?

Mizter T wrote:

As has already been stated, it would appear that we don't have the
technology - or rather, the current DTT standards do not appear to
allow for one video feed to be overlaid on top of another.

I think we have. MHEG could do a crude overlay, but AIUI, the avatar
method is preferred and needs rather a lot of bitstream. Thus it would
probably mean another stream. As to whether current STBs can select a
second stream is something the experts can comment on.

In article [email protected], Christopher Woods
wrote:
I actually quite like RDS, I enjoy seeing what the station name is when
I'm travelling without having to wait until an ident or the news break,
and I do use the TA and TP (EON-TP is very useful if you're doing a long
car journey!)

I'm sure some people will have found a use for it, but since the station
name is pretty much constant in my case, and the display is shared with
the satnav, RDS is completely ignored in my car, and I suspect by most
people who have it - if they even know they have it, or what it is. It
does what it is supposed to do, but to me it looks like a solution that
never found a really worthy problem.

Rod.

True, I suppose... I think I just love it because I'm a geek

What I did always think was a bit pointless though were the TA and TP
buttons on home mini hifi systems that had RDS-compatible tuners in...

Paul D.Smith wrote:

I wonder how much of the design of RDS was fixing the "moving target"
problem with FM in cars followed by a period of "right, we can send digital
data and we've got spare bandwidth - what do we do with it?"

I think the driving force (ha, note the pun !) was auto re-tuning for national
networks. I recall a Philips car radio, pre RDS days, where you'd program in
the frequencies for R2 etc on the route of your intended journey, and it would
auto switch as you progressed.

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

Yes, though at risk of opening an enormous can of worms, the quality of
education for deaf people - especially signing deaf people - in this
country has historically been (and in some cases still is) rather
suboptimal.

you make a very valid point there...

Unfortunately from a born deaf child's point of view, where you are born
makes a massive difference to the educational upbringing that is recieved.

If you were born in Wales or Durham or or some other places you recieved an
education conducted in BSL. The trouble with BSL is that it does not
encourage deaf children to hear, listen or speak at all. In addition, there
is no written form of BSL so the deaf child is not encouraged to read or
write let alone spell or learn grammar.

However, if you were born in Oxfordshire or Leicestershire, you'd be fitted
with hearing aids, and you would hear with hearing aids, and hopefully
listen, and hopefully catch language just like the other hearing children
do. This of course sets you up for learning the abilities to read, write,
spell, grammar rules and of course to speak.

I was very fortunate that despite being born profoundly deaf, I was fitted
up with hearing aids at age 3, sent to hearing schools, where I was the
first and only deaf child each school I went to ever had. I had the support
of a visiting teacher of the deaf who looked after my best interests....

This set me up to attend University, not once, not twice but 3 times as I
gained a bachelors, a masters and a doctorate degree. It is very sad to note
that a deaf child is 16 times less likely to go to university to for a
undergraduate degree than a hearing child. The figures are of course worse
for masters and doctoral degrees.

It would be fair to say that deaf children who recieved an education in BSL
will have found their opportunities for career advancement severely
curtailed.

According to the RNID, 1 in 6 people have a hearing loss, and there are only
4 profoundly deaf adults in the whole of the UK with doctoral
qualifications.......

Regards

Stephen

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 18:03:10 +0000, lid (Alan Pemberton) wrote:

kimble wrote:

Subtitles are of course invaluable for the large numbers of people who
have a mild or moderate hearing loss, who just need the occasional cue
to disambiguate the audio.

Indeed, though these days the subtitlers seem to have worse hearing than
mine, and I find myself distracted by clearly incorrect captions. I
dread to think how 'disambiguate' would turn out.

Is it real people doing the subtitling? The quality is so poor I had assumed that they had some
automated voice recognition system nowadays. It's often almost impossible to make out any sense from
the subtitles.
--

Cheers

Nigel Barker
Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur

"Mallory" wrote in message
...


If you were born in Wales or Durham or or some other places you recieved
an education conducted in BSL. The trouble with BSL is that it does not
encourage deaf children to hear, listen or speak at all. In addition,
there is no written form of BSL so the deaf child is not encouraged to
read or write let alone spell or learn grammar.

However, if you were born in Oxfordshire or Leicestershire, you'd be
fitted with hearing aids, and you would hear with hearing aids, and
hopefully listen, and hopefully catch language just like the other hearing
children do. This of course sets you up for learning the abilities to
read, write, spell, grammar rules and of course to speak.

I was very fortunate that despite being born profoundly deaf, I was fitted
up with hearing aids at age 3, sent to hearing schools, where I was the
first and only deaf child each school I went to ever had. I had the
support of a visiting teacher of the deaf who looked after my best
interests....

This set me up to attend University, not once, not twice but 3 times as I
gained a bachelors, a masters and a doctorate degree. It is very sad to
note that a deaf child is 16 times less likely to go to university to for
a undergraduate degree than a hearing child. The figures are of course
worse for masters and doctoral degrees.

It would be fair to say that deaf children who recieved an education in
BSL will have found their opportunities for career advancement severely
curtailed.

According to the RNID, 1 in 6 people have a hearing loss, and there are
only 4 profoundly deaf adults in the whole of the UK with doctoral
qualifications.......





from the little i've seen of programs like see hear, there seems to be quite
a few people who i'd call 'militant' deaf.
asking them to do what you have would seem to offend them as much as asking
a black person to pretend they are white - it's really hard for me to
understand - they see being deaf not as something that just happened to
their body, but as their actual identity.


--
Gareth.

That fly... is your magic wand.
http://www.last.fm/user/dsbmusic/

Nigel Barker wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 18:03:10 +0000, lid (Alan Pemberton) wrote:

kimble wrote:

Subtitles are of course invaluable for the large numbers of people who
have a mild or moderate hearing loss, who just need the occasional cue
to disambiguate the audio.
Indeed, though these days the subtitlers seem to have worse hearing than
mine, and I find myself distracted by clearly incorrect captions. I
dread to think how 'disambiguate' would turn out.

Is it real people doing the subtitling? The quality is so poor I had assumed that they had some
automated voice recognition system nowadays. It's often almost impossible to make out any sense from
the subtitles.
--

Cheers

Nigel Barker
Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur
Yes I think it is Voice Recognition, with the subtitler sometimes
voicing over the words, certainly with pre-recorded stuff.
Before I left we used to get the odd call from a subtitler at home in
the wilds of Cumbria or somewhere referring to the poor quality of an
ISDN link.

lid (Alan Pemberton) writes:

Well, some satellite boxes can inlay a small picture from a second
channel

As can some Freeview boxes.

On 30/10/2007, Sean Black wrote in message
:

So is there any reason, this all can't be accessible via the red button?
Then any deaf people that want it can watch it, whilst not spoiling
things for everyone else.

It would take up the bandwidth of another channel. And it would be one
where additional adverts had no effect. Which means that the broadcaster
would be halving their profit.

Simon.
--
http://www.hearsay.demon.co.uk