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

[media] RE: Media Matrix: Issue re Clear Audio

From: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 08:53:00 -0700 (PDT)
To: "'Silvia Pfeiffer'" <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Cc: "'HTML Accessibility Task Force'" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <023c01cb7138$069f6dd0$13de4970$@edu>
Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>
> I think "track set within a container" is fine.
>
> If you find any other unclear formulations, please do point them out.
> Feel free to make the changes yourself or I'm happy to make those
> little but important changes for you. We want to communicate clearly
> what we mean.

Quick question: is there value in establishing a
vocabulary/glossary/taxonomy list at the head of the checklist document?
Also, are we comfortable enough now to remove the WARNING: from the top of
that document?

Thoughts?

JF


>
>
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
> wrote:
> > Thanks again, Silvia.
> >
> > I think I'll just start playing the role of language police in the
> hope
> > of nudging us to greater clarity in how we refer to things. I think
> our
> > brief conversation at the end of today's telecon was very helpful.
> I'm
> > very comfortable with the taxonomical category of "track." That
> > communicates, imho, clearly both when provided in a separate file or
> as
> > a separate "track" in a containerized set of tracks.
> >
> > Is that correct? Would we say "track set?"
> >
> > Janina
> >
> > Silvia Pfeiffer writes:
> >> I've made the change to
> >>
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_Accessibility_User_Requirement
> s#Clear_audio
> >> .
> >>
> >> However, we should be clear that separate audio tracks can be
> provided
> >> both within a media container or as separate resources and we
> probably
> >> want to support both in the same way. I do think your wording is
> >> appropriate though.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Silvia.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:27 AM, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
> wrote:
> >> > The primary Clear Audio requirement should read:
> >> >
> >> > (CA-1) Support clear audio as a separate, alternative audio track
> from other audio-based alternative media resources.
> >> >
> >> > The salient point is that we do not require user agents to create
> clear
> >> > audio. Rather, clear audio is, or is not produced at the same time
> as
> >> > the primary media resource audio is mxed down. Thus, it becomes
> simply
> >> > another alternative media resource to be correctly identified by
> >> > metadata.
> >> >
> >> > Any user agent which wishes to expiriment with "reverse karaoke"
> type
> >> > strategies to create something approaching clear audio is welcome
> to do
> >> > so, of course. However, that is not how we expect clear audio to
> be
> >> > generated, nor is it how clear audio is generated today.
> >> >
> >> > Janina
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> >
> >> > Janina Sajka,   Phone:  +1.443.300.2200
> >> >                sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
> >> >
> >> > Chair, Open Accessibility       janina@a11y.org
> >> > Linux Foundation                http://a11y.org
> >> >
> >> > Chair, Protocols & Formats
> >> > Web Accessibility Initiative    http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
> >> > World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Janina Sajka,   Phone:  +1.443.300.2200
> >                sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
> >
> > Chair, Open Accessibility       janina@a11y.org
> > Linux Foundation                http://a11y.org
> >
> > Chair, Protocols & Formats
> > Web Accessibility Initiative    http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
> > World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
> >
> >
> >
Received on Thursday, 21 October 2010 15:53:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:22 GMT