ASL is not signed English. It has its own distinct grammar. Many people who use ASL are more comfortable and fluent using ASL than communicating using English text.
Okay but now you need this very complicated video system to communicate, rather than text which works everywhere and you can read at your own pace. Also with this system it would still be auto-translated from written English so I can't see it being more expressive than the source text.
How many people find the video of the guy easier to understand than the text saying King's Cross - 14:29 - Cancelled?
I have no problem with the language, I'm just genuinely curious who this tech is for.
I totally get that it's useful to have a separate sign language for communicating in person. But machine translating English text into a video of a person signing when the original English text is right next to it? Does anyone find that useful? How many people know ASL/BSL but can't read English?
