W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > May 2011

[media] Minutes of the May 11 Media Sub team teleconference

From: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 19:19:50 -0700 (PDT)
To: "'HTML Accessibility Task Force'" <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00c801cc104b$1286af70$37940e50$@edu>
Friends,

The minutes from the May 11 Media sub-team teleconference can be found at:
http://www.w3.org/2011/05/11-html-a11y-minutes.html 

...as well as in plain text form after this announcement. Any errors or
omissions should be reported to this list.

Thanks!

JF

============================

HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference
11 May 2011

See also: IRC log (http://www.w3.org/2011/05/11-html-a11y-irc) 
Attendees

Present
Regrets
Chair
    Janina_Sajka
Scribe
    JF

Contents

    Topics
        Identify Scribe
        Next Steps on Multitrack: Listing Kinds/Types
        Actions Review http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/open
        Media Alt Technologies
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_Alt_Technologies
    Summary of Action Items

<trackbot> Date: 11 May 2011

<scribe> Meeting: HTML-A11Y telecon

<scribe> agenda: this

<scribe> scribe: JF
Identify Scribe

<scribe> scribe: JF

<janina> trackbot, start meeting

<trackbot> Meeting: HTML Accessibility Task Force Teleconference

<trackbot> Date: 11 May 2011

<scribe> scribe: JF
Next Steps on Multitrack: Listing Kinds/Types

JS: looking to summarize outstanding issues

SP: Navigation with full descriptions is solved, but not heirarchal
navigation
... But we've put this on the back-burner until we can start to do some
expermentation - there is a bug in the tracker already

<Sean> could be me

<Sean> my mic doesnt seem to be working

<Sean> I'm working on it

SP: the 2 open issues are hierarchical navigation, and the second is alt
technologies

which is on the list and agenda today, and to finish of the @kind listing
for inband

<mark> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Track_Kinds

JS: Picking up from last weeks conversation

not sure how to steer this - are we happy with this list on the wiki? Is
it sufficently defined?

Mark: what we are left with is 3 new kids to be proposed

we seem to almost agree to re-open the original bug and request to have
them added

the only other thing is to decide what to do with the questions from 3GPP

JS: do we need to worry if our list is 100% accurate before we file
another bug?

JF: thought mark suggested that we re-open existing bug

JS: is there disagreement to doing that? who can do it?

mark: whomever is best suited to crafting bug text that the editor is
sympathetic too

JB: perhaps Silvia could do that?

SP: I could, but i don't think I should be the one - suggest that perhaps
mark could do it as well

JB: support that

Mark: concerned about process, but can take a stab at it

SP/JB: circulate draft prior to submission for ffeedback

JS: is there more to discuss? are we pretty happy with it?

Mark: regarding Clear Audio, should we link to the wiki page

JS: we have discussed the status of that page in the past, but current
status is unclear

JB: have been wondering about this as well. the user reqs and tech reqs in
this sub-group have been referenced widely

however this is a wiki, and anyone can make changes without our knowing it
- so it is not stable

the preferable thing to do is to stabilize it, but the a11yTF don't have
publication authorization

without going through the full HTML WG

so there are a number of different routes to follow

+q

JS: the other parent group is PF

JB: yes was formally set up as a joint TF

PF can work on this in public

PF could possibly take this on

JS: question - would people mind if this was published by PF rather than
HTML WG?

SP: not too concerned where it is published, PF could handle this, but if
people want it to get through the HTML WG process as a tech report or
something we could follow that prodess

believe that PF would be appropriate

+1 to have this in PF (public) space

JS: any objections then?
... will take that on then and move towards a permenant URI

<scribe> ACTION: Janina to take the user reqs and tech reqs and get that
published under PF [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2011/05/11-html-a11y-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-126 - Take the user reqs and tech reqs and get
that published under PF [on Janina Sajka - due 2011-05-18].

JB: I think there is one section that needs some minor editing, so before
it becomes more formal a quick pass would be appropriate

but we could likley lock the page

SP: prefer not to lock the page

as we continue to add clariffication

while those changes are minor, they are useful

suggest that taking it to PF, and in that process to clean up the wording,
etc., that would be good

JS: I have tried to search for a good clear explanation of how/what Clear
Audio is, but have only found annecdotal content

perhaps we can find more clarification, as it seems incomplete in our
document

SH: I can check at BBC for that

JS: thanks mark for helping us move the document forward/

+q

JS: any other questions on the topic and the wiki?

JB: are we looking to do this on both user reqs and tech reqs?

my recollection was that we got more traction with the mapping exercise

believes there is a technical list

<silvia>
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_Accessibility_Tech_Requirements
<- this one?

JB: remembers a list of technical requirements as well as user
requirements

SP: don't think we kept that document up to date

JB: OK, that sounds right, retract the suggestion

JF: what to do with the 3GPP issue?

Mark: questions are on the @trak kinds page

Questions from 3GPP

In [1] they ask:

whether our hope to recommend use of W3C 'role' names, in our
specification, seems achievable and reasonable, in your opinion;

your thinking on the set of names;

your schedule for defining at least a stable initial set of names;

whether you will define a URN to identify the set you define.

JS: believes that a) yes, we can respond, likely in a few weeks, and that
PF would provide the URN for referencing the list
... so responding here, formally on behalf of the group, likely falls to
JF and JS

SP: just to note that the request for clarification came to the HTML WG

wonder if we need to pass it through that group first

SP: came via PLH - but think it should go through HTML WG

JB: if it is a liason query, then it would likley be through staff

Judy and PLH work together on those often

Mark: notes that the request was addressed to the a11yTF group, addressed
to David singer

JB: David, PLH and I will be together next week and will walk this through
to the end

<mark> correction: the 3GPP contact person is David Singer

JS: any other questions with @kind?
Actions Review http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/open

<silvia> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/99

JS: still working on this, but yes, still active

<silvia> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/109

next item: http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/109

on Sean

SH: I believe this is done, and can be closed

<silvia> close action 109
Media Alt Technologies
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_Alt_Technologies

SP: have looked at alt technologies when video and audio are not playing

similar to no image display

so what do we do with the empty space in particular for people who cannot
see the empty space

may also be a useful situation for people who may still want to know what
audio and video is

ie; low bandwidth, deaf/blind, etc.

so that is the background that I have approached it from

another is, what if there are 20 videos on the page, when tabbing through
we need an indication as to what these videos represent

which to a sighted user comes from the placeholder frame

but for non-sighted needs a text alternative

+q

being careful not to use the term poster

SP: so that is the background, and the wiki page is linked here

saw that this could be a problem to solve

have discussed this with other developers and blind users

also needed to understand the alt technologies available

<Sean> Sean again

as this is related to where we have gone in the past

SP: so I have identified 3 use cases

that I think needs to be catered for

but anything that is time-aligned is not pertinent here

as this has already been addressed via the track element

JS: so we have 2 tiypes of transcript, one that is time-stmped and one
that is not

SP: yes

perhaps start with the @transcription proposal

a new attribute proposed has the use of linking to an off-page
transcription file

use case is that we have a very long and detailed transcription, but too
long to be cited on the page

this would be most useful for deaf/blind and/or low-bandwidth users

while talking with people at google, they have had this request for a long
time

ie: non-timed-aligned text, currently YouTube strips time-alignment from
text when they receive the request

SP: so we can either provide an "in the clear" link on the page, either
visible or positioned off-page

or having the attribute

don't like the position off page solution, so would prefer to see it as a
link in the video element

ack: jan

JS: agrees that a contextual menu would likely be the better solution

SP: yes, I think that this would be the most useful as well

JS: one question - if we call this transcription, what do we call the text
file with the time-stamp
... we need to be very clear on how we name this

Mark: does it make any sense if the UA could strip the time-stamp data,
could we repurpose this?

JB: the text, where-ever you pause, my be widely un-aligned with the media

we are dealing with the question of 'appropriateness' without to much
analysis

Mark: the question is, can the entire timestamp text also fufill the need
of the transcript - if the UA can strip the timestamping

SP: caption file only captures what is being spoken plus with a bit of
sound-effects

but a transcript also captures what is happening on screen

transcript is more a combination of captions and audio description

ie: a caption file does not explain what is on screen - all you get is
what the dialog is

it *could* be automatically be done by merging the caption and description
file, but this sounds complex/complicated

JS: to my mind transcript is much closer to script in the classical
theatrical use

it has both dialog and "stage" direction

but may not include descriptive audio text

SP: I think the author needs to determine what is appropriate

JS: I agree, what I am suggesting is that the transcript needs to be
aligned to the running media

if it is not a caption file, or a descriptive audio/text file

SP: this can be done already, don't believe that this is a use-case that
needs to be addressed here

JS: at the very least we need to disambiguate them

we need to give them clear names so that we can easily tell what is time
aligned and what is not

mark: I believe that the question was well answered. It just seems that i
would be useful if the author could write once and have the UA do the
'splitting apart'

SP: believes that this would be done on the server, not built into the
browser

<mark> I didn't necessarily mean the *UA* would do the splitting

SP: YouTube calls their "timed transcript" their interactive transcript

Eric: don't think that "interactive" is appropriate, because it may not in
fact be interactive

JS: any other ideas of names?

JB: would rather look at the different things on a page by definition, it
might be easier to spot the differences and find a candidate name

think that these terms that these terms already may be considered
"reserved" terms in certain circles

we might consider to look at what was done with figcaption, so that it
helps disambiguate the term

JS: perhaps we need to set the naming aside, and perhaps move on

SP: wnated to ask Eric why he thinks it is not interactive
... so are we in agreement that adding a new attribute is the best way
forward? perhaps poll the group?

JF: is there anyone on the call opposed to introducing a new attribute
mechanism to achieve this?

SP: Eric, if we provide a time-stamped transcript on the page why would
you be opposed to calling it 'interactive'

Eric: because it may be that users could not actually 'interact' with the
text

if that is going to be a requirement, then we need to discuss, but don't
believe that it will be one

Eric: seems to me that time is what it's all about - I don't have a
problem with this, but don't think this is a key issue at this time

JS: OK so we should drop the naming question for now. will add a section
to the wiki page to foster more discusssion

SP; another use-case is a short text alternative

another is one that you tap onto a video, and you want to know if you
should hit the play button or not

for sighted users, this comes from looking at the image and the associated
text

for a11y reasons we have to replace what is being seen on thta image to
non-sighted users

so a textual alternative is required

Marco (Zehe) suggests that this needs to be short and succinct

so that when a non-sighted users tabs through the images, the text is
short and succinct

looking at what might solve this problem I looked at the different options

marco suggested aria-label and they all seem to agree that it is the most
useful here

JS: I think that marco is 50% correct

we need to treat the image as any other image

+q

we need both a short 'handle' as well as an ability to expose a longer
description

JF: talked with Victor Tsaran at yahoo! and he disagrees that aria-label
is appropriate

problem is that label is for list and interactive content

as well, with @alt if images are not supported the text renders on screen,
where as aria-lable text is not shown on screen

JS: Silvia, would you like me to ask PF to focus on this further

SP: this is new, so we can do whatever we want

makes sense that we have one mechanism not 2, and believes we should be in
sync with images

but not married to either option

but don't want an either/or scenario

it should be clear, and one solution

JS: believe that this would be an interesting use case discussion for WAI

we have a need to support i18n, and ARIA is the better way of doing that

JS: this is something useful to continue to discuss. We are also looking
at a very short list of additions to ARIA
... sad to note we are out of time

SP: I would rather finish this discussion, but it seems we are out of time

JS: we will start back up with this next week
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Janina to take the user reqs and tech reqs and get that
published under PF [recorded in
http://www.w3.org/2011/05/11-html-a11y-minutes.html#action01]
 
[End of minutes]
============================
Received on Thursday, 12 May 2011 02:22:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:38 GMT