W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > February 2010

Re: Agenda: HTML-A11Y - 04 February 2010 at 16:00Z - Topic: bugs 8187 and 5758 (media), face-to-face planning

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 13:01:41 +1100
Message-ID: <2c0e02831002031801v76747a3erde66d3fd9cc6ad2c@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>
Cc: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
I will not be able to attend the meeting (it will be 3am here at that
time), but here is some input to the video related agenda items /
updates on status.

I believe we may want to have a Media Subgroup phone conference soon
to discuss whether we have now actually managed to collect all the
requirements and discuss our progress on those requirements that
relate to HTML5 specification changes.

Now some feedback on the bugs as listed below:

On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 2:44 AM, Michael(tm) Smith <mike@w3.org> wrote:
> The following two bugs have already been determined by the TF facilitators to
> be possible especially-high priorities:
>
> 5758    insufficient accessibility fallback for <audio> or <video>
> 8187    Section 4.8.7 on video makes no reference to audio description

5758 is in fact one of the key areas of work of our Media Subgroup
here and you may have noticed a large discussion on our mailing list
about this in recent weeks (with a break over Christmas). It is marked
as resolved later, but since later it no a specific date, could be
addressed any time IMO.

I am very much determined to solve the issue of in-band and
out-of-band captions, subtitles, and audio descriptions (which IMO
includes textual audio descriptions). I have thus updated our Media
Subgroup wiki at http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Multimedia_Q%26A
with a more intensive look at the different "accommodation types".

This is not finalised, but another step towards a full picture to be
developed in our Subgroup.

A large part of this picture is to make implementations of the
different solutions. Some of the things listed there do not need new
developments in the browser, but can already be delivered (e.g. a link
to a text transcript related by aria-describedBy).

I am keen to do demo implementations of those that require new markup
& new APIs for HTML5, which relate mostly to audio and video
alternatives. I believe that Philip from Opera and Eric from
Webkit/Apple are also keen on this (I'm interpreting their actions
from the discussion thread).

We are now in discussions sorting out the first draft new markup and
APIs that we can agree on and will then attempt to implement (which in
turn will certainly lead to more changes). Everyone is encouraged to
provide input!

I believe writing the specs and making the demo implementations are a
good step towards addressing 5758 and towards getting these new
specifications into the HTML5 specification.

We will continue to propose/discuss specifications on the mailing
list, and add those that we can agree on to the wiki to prepare for
demo implementations.


As for 8187: it was accepted and "audio description" was added to the
HTML5 specification, so it was resolved and closed fixed. The
requirement to actually support audio descriptions through a dedicated
markup and API are not actually part of that bug, but rather fit into
5758.


> The remaining four bugs from the list are tentatively being considered lower
> priorities (pending discussion with the TF).
>
> 8658    Availability of captions or additional audio tracks
> 8657    Allow UA to reload fallback content if it fails to load
> 8659    Media events to indicate captions and audio descriptions
> 8736    Decision to playback for media should be left to the user agent

8658 was accepted and led to some additions in the HTML5
specification, so was resolved and closed fixed. I'm happy with those
changes, which suggest indicating caption/audio description/sign
language availability as part of the video's controls. The only issue
here is that if no controls are being shown, there is currently no
JavaScript API to find out about the information and create these
controls manually. This is what 8659 us about.

8657 is unclear what it is supposed to mean, so was resolved with
needsinfo - and the bug submitter hasn't added any further
information. I personally don't understand the request either.

8659 is still open and the Media Subgroup has started working on a
JavaScript API to expose the track composition of a media resource
(see the lengthy email thread on "timing model of the media resource
in HTML5").

8736 is based on a misunderstanding IMO, unless the reporter clarifies
what he meant. It is still open, but could be closed with a needsinfo.

> A goal for the meeting should be that we have volunteers committed to following
> up at least on bugs 5758 and 8187, and an initial plan of action decided upon
> on how to proceed with them.

What follow-up is required?
IMO 8187, 8658, and 8657 were resolved appropriately. 8736 should be
resolved with needsinfo.

As for 5758 and 8659, these are core areas of work of the people in
the Media Subgroup. It might be a good idea to organise a phone
conference to agree on an action plan for these two. For now, I think
we will proceed as through discussions on the mailing list, consensus
drafts in the wiki, and demo implementations as outlined above, unless
there is a different process to follow.

Best Regards,
Silvia.
Received on Thursday, 4 February 2010 02:02:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:01 GMT