I understand that talking could be much more quick/fluent in a person to person interaction, plus it doesn’t need any technical means of writing, whether pen and paper or a computer. But isn’t technical support a rare use case where typing speed is not a big bottleneck and where also writing things out can help precision and cut down on having to repeat yourself? Given that resources are always limited, wouldn’t it be better to invest in accessibility where that the most impact?

Accessibility is about meeting people where they are, rather than just trying to cater to the lowest common denominator by finding “workarounds”. Apple already provides a technical chat service, and I’m quite sure deaf people are capable of using it. Is people are choosing to use this Video Relay service, its for a reason, presumably because they find ASL easier to work with than written language. Perhaps it’s an age thing, personal preference, or maybe they have other difficulties that make reading and writing difficult. But forcing people to use the cheapest form of communication simply because catering to their needs is a “corner case” isn’t providing accessibility, it’s ignoring the needs of individuals because they’re inconvenient.

I previously worked at a video relay service company (VRS in the US is a service paid for by the TRS fund through the FCC, and allows Deaf and hard-of-hearing people to make phone calls through video-chat with a ASL interpreter). In written English-based interactions with Deaf and hard-of-hearing colleagues, there is often a communication barrier as there often is with anyone speaking a second language.

In my personal experience working on tickets written by D/deaf colleagues, while sometimes we could communicate by whiteboard or text-based chat, it was indispensable to have the option to discuss the ticket with someone who could interpret present.