Event banner
Event details
107 Comments
- Zoom allows participants to easily adjust the size of the BSL interpreters video feed (e.g. to see their hands more clearly) and pin the BSL interpreter even when someone is presenting their screen/ presentation - will this be possible with Teams?
- elisabeth_jones
Microsoft
Hi Priyesh, thank you for the feedback! We are working on a number of ways to make the stage experience more flexible - the features that are currently rolling out are just a first step. If a user is having trouble seeing their interpreter when content is being shared, one thing that might help is popping out the content into another window (since it leaves more window real estate for the signer videos).
- We are interested to know how this feature is planned to work for tablet/mobile users/ if it will come to mobile and tablet anytime soon?
csanoHi Maria! No current support for mobile but this is something that we eventually want to support.
- +1 on this, will there be a specific specs for a deaf needed if they’re going to sign language in mobile or smaller screen
- Good afternoon - how many interpreters can we add as signers? Can it be different for everyone’s screen? For example, someone may require the ASL, but another person may require the CLT to be in the “view.” Additionally, is there more information about users having the option to turn on live captions by default so that's ready when they join meetings? Thank you!
- JessieHwangGreat question! The Sign Language view is a local view to that user only. Any changes to that view only impact that users meeting view. This helps any user connect to the interpreters that work best for their needs. Teams will show up to two signers at a time, but the user can set as many signers as they want and they'll show on the main stage in the order that they were made a signer. As signers turn off their video, they will be moved to the gallery and the next available video will then be presented on the main meeting view. Live Captions can be set to turn on by default in the new Accessibility Settings. This setting can be found during the meeting by going to the “… more” menu at the top of the screen. Go down to the “Accessibility” option. The setting will show on the right-hand side of the screen, and you will be able to turn on Captions by Default. This will be remembered for this computer/Teams instance.
- Hi there, we are a few of the staff from Hearing Dogs for Deaf People, UK. This is a great feature that a number of our beneficiaries will be excited to learn about! Is there any plans to make it so that admin/meeting owners can pre set up the signers, so that when people turn on the accessibility features the signers are already available? Currently we have tested it and found that individuals have to assign the signers separately even when the meeting owner has marked them. Also will there be a way to assign accounts external to our network as signers again before the meeting starts?
- elisabeth_jonesHi Laura, thanks for that feedback! Setting an interpreter for everyone is something we're working on; no timeline yet. In the meantime, this is as you note a user-side setting. For interpreters inside your tenant, you can preassign them in the Accessibility settings pane; interpreters outside the tenant currently do need to be added after the meeting has started. Full details here: https://aka.ms/SignLanguageSupport
- I was able to add an external emails address to Manage Signers panel although I have not tested it yet but setting a call with the myself joining using a personal account to see what happens.
- I hope the release will align for GCC+ tenants. We need this ASAP. Thanks! 🙂
- elisabeth_jonesHi Ong, these features will be rolling out to GCC simultaneously with commercial tenants, this month (rollout has already started). Should be a relatively fast-follow for GCC-H/DoD, in the first quarter of 2023.
- Will the sign language views have more FPS? Better video quality for sign language users?
- elisabeth_jonesSign language view does provide higher-quality video for individuals who are designated as signers - I'm not sure about the specific technical details.
- Hello, I'm joining from Kansas and use sign language interpreters + captioners and transcripts through all my meetings, in-person or virtual. What input and usability testing did you get from people with disabilities before launching this feature, and if there are methods for refining this feature such as how to empower individuals to have the best view for accessibility (as everyone's needs are different), how can we get that feedback to you?
- JessieHwangHello! We worked with a select set of US state governments, their deaf and hard of hearing users, a paid advisory board that helps across Microsoft, individual user feedback, and employees here within Microsoft, and we also ran user research studies, including interpreters and those from the deaf and hard of hearing community. We definitely want your feedback! Head to our Teams Feedback Portal (https://aka.ms/TeamsFeedback) and drop your idea or feedback there - it goes straight to the Teams Engineering team.
- Hello. My name is Billy Howell and I am in North Carolina. As a technologist and a person who supports customers as a contractor, I have specific concerns around Teams and Teams Live events roadmap. Specifically ... For entities who are held accountable for considering accommodations for users who have protected statuses such as deaf and hard of hearing, the ambiguity between teams and teams live events makes it difficult to determine which features are actually present in each platform. Entities who have to select solutions which are bound by these considerations are unable to consider the Teams platform for large scale meetings because the limitation of 1000 users that teams has for video streaming means that users who rely on sign language interpreters cannot see the interpreter. Teams live events doesn’t have that technical restriction on video streaming, but the newest sign language view is not available in live events. I would ask if the appropriate priority can be placed on either unifying both platforms' feature sets used for accessibility OR the 1000 participant limit be addressed so that live events can be retired as the work around? The 1000 participant limit seems like an engineering resource constraint put on the product to prevent oversaturation of that platform's infrastructure. The lack of unified features between the platforms seems like a lack of development resources. Both seem addressable from an outside perspective.
- csanoHi Billy, we hear you. This is something that we have gotten a lot of feedback on. Sign language interpreter support for Live Events is a top priority for us and is something that we are working towards.
Can Microsoft commit to a timeframe for these requests? Some of your customers are having to make purchasing decisions and the competition has similar features, which are at scale.
- Hey Billy, I'm also a contractor with multiple customers. I agree with your sentiment, but I wanted to remind you of the scale of live events due to the distribution via CDN, vs a P2P call or hosted meeting. It's not practical to expect any meeting platform to host 10K participants in a real time stream. It's obviously an engineering constraint, but I wouldn't give MS a hard time over this decision, considering they're already double the capacity of their competitors. Zoom is considered the leader in this space and they only have plans for 100, 300 and 500 participants, with the option to purchase additional participants in 500/1000 chunks. Teams is already the industry leader on meeting capacity of 1000 for regular meetings and 10K in live events with the unique positioning of CDN distribution. They are very different use cases and should not be merged together. I do not agree with you labelling it as a work-around. It's not a work-around, it's a different type of meeting for a different use case. IMO, why would you ever want over 1000 participants in a meeting (reminder that PARTICIPANTS contribute to an unmoderated chat and can generally unmute, turn on their cameras and screen share, and I don't see a use case where you'd ever want to give that ability to more than 1000 people. Even if you can disable it for most in the settings - that's not the intended use case). We're hoping this interpreter feature comes to live events soon, but for now we're using OBS to remix multiple camera feeds into a live event. Additionally, using OBS on a live event actually results in higher video quality. Perhaps you can prepare an infographic for your customers to help them better understand?
- You are free to take issue with my interpretation of it being an engineering decision to limit teams video streaming. I remain unconvinced. Regardless, if the features exist in a smaller meeting, they should exist in a larger one. And if MS takes the stance that they are separate products and use cases, then the entities which MUST consider accessibility as a requirement will give that money to Zoom to be compliant.
- Will users be able to adjust interpreter views & pop-out the cams? This will help with viewing captions. The ability to move and adjust the space as needed for each individual will be beneficial.
- JessieHwangThis isn't a feature, but you can pop out content to help separate that and the videos. Reference: https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/microsoft-teams-blog/what-s-new-in-microsoft-teams-october-2022/ba-p/3666435. Please submit this idea to the Teams Feedback portal (https://aka.ms/TeamsFeedback) so that we can get this in front of our engineering team!
- Hello! I help organize meetings in a Teams channel that was established in 2019, and often include sign language interpreters. I've found that by comparison to other Teams meeting platforms, the features we can access are somewhat limited (e.g., no automated breakout rooms, some trouble with outsiders using cameras & microphones, etc.) — will whatever structural problem inhibits those features also be present when attempting to use an interpreter in this channel?
