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

Re: Please Read (was RE: Survey on Media Accessibility Requirements)

From: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2010 17:59:32 -0400
To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Cc: HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Message-Id: <E1OJvyc-0007bo-Rh@bart.w3.org>
At 12:26 AM 6/2/2010 +1000, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
><...>
>We have already in the past collected legal requirements for media
>accessibility at
>http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_TextAssociations_Requirements

FYI, legal requirements for accessibility are constantly evolving. 
Those currently listed here include some rather old sets, for 
instance they appear to include the US Section 508 regulations, circa 
2000, ten years ago, which is in the process of being updated. I 
don't believe that they capture all the relevant US laws or regs 
related to media accessibility. And they include the UK's DDA, and 
the Council of the EU's requirements, but not those from many other 
countries. So we should be careful not to imply that these are a 
comprehensive or necessarily up-to-date set of legal requirements. I 
think it's better to work from the lists of user and technical 
requirements that we've been compiling.

- Judy

>.
>None of the legal requirements come to the level of sophistication
>requested in the requirements document that is currently under
>discussion. For example, even where captions are required, there is no
>requirement on formatting and styling of captions, not to speak of
>extended captions.
>
>I would not have that limit us, though, since we know that in the past
>many of the requirements that users had were limited by technical
>possibilities and many of the laws were similarly built to work within
>technical possibilities. I would rather we assume a perfect world
>where everything is possible for the purposes of gathering
>requirements - which is essentially what we have done.
>
>In a next step, it will be good to compile a priority list from the 
>given list.
>
>Regards,
>Silvia.
Received on Wednesday, 2 June 2010 21:59:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:11 GMT