W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > June 2012

Re: [media] progress on video transcript discussion

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 18:03:44 +1000
Message-ID: <CAHp8n2k+2cYT77MMNy6Ab6n4JyRSJG0jxYt97UVF6gyzD=jb4w@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
Cc: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 4:39 PM, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca> wrote:
> Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>> >
>> > I am thrilled to see it
>> being
>> > used more and more every day in mainstream development, but we must
>> all
>> > remember that it is designed for (and currently only works with) AT
>> tools,
>> > which only cover a small percentage of people with disabilities.
>> I am proposing ARIA as a solution where only people with disabilities
>> need it.
> But this is where your understanding of ARIA seems to break down. ARIA is
> tha bomb, but only if you are using an ARIA aware tool, which currently is
> Screen Readers and related vision assistance tools. It is not for "people
> with disabilities", it is for primarily blind users, who are users with but
> one type of disability.

OK, sorry, I mis-wrote. I am using ARIA only where blind and
vision-impaired users need it. For all other needs I have proposed a
generic solution.

> I will suggest that for those users that Read Write Gold has been created
> and targeted to, access to a transcript will be a significant assistance (if
> not outright requirement), yet linking the fact that a transcript exists by
> only using an ARIA technique will fail these users completely.  Read Write
> Gold is not a "web tool", and it was never designed to deal with content
> that is targeted to some users but not others, which is essentially what all
> of the current hiding techniques do in the current web language.

When the transcript is not visible, there is a link.
When the transcript is visible, they can see it and don't need any more notice.
So, there is no problem.

> I appreciate that you want to find a solution for those users who need a
> transcript in the scenario where the designer does not want a visible <a
> href>link</a> to display on-screen, but using ARIA alone is not the
> solution, as much as you and others may want it to be.  It is for this exact
> reason that I continue to insist that a mechanism for exposure and selection
> needs to be closely linked to the primary media controls in some fashion. I
> have already suggested that imposing "the 1 way" now is perhaps early, and
> that a time for experimenting with various control solutions is appropriate,
> but simply shunting it off to "ARIA: job done" is sadly not enough.

You still haven't read my full email and proposal. It makes me really
sad when you ignore half of what I am saying and twist the first half
without seeing the full picture.

>> As for the programmatic linkage that you are after: my proposal
>> actually includes this with @transcript being a URL and not an IDREF
>> any longer for the reasons explained.
> This is actually what my first proposal sought to do - to create the linkage
> to the transcript directly as an attribute that took the URL of the
> transcript
> (http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/index.php?title=ChangeProposal/Issue194). I
> still believe that this could be an effective solution, but the overwhelming
> feedback from many implementers was less than encouraging (and I am being
> both gracious and charitable in that characterization). The WHAT WG IRC logs
> will surface the actual response if you care to seek them out (however they
> were *considerably less* charitable or gracious, and were in fact quite
> personal in nature).

My reasoning is much more sound now and it is a complete solution
proposal. We have made huge progress since then. Sometimes one comes
back to what was proposed earlier because one has excluded use cases
that can now be satisfied differently. Seeing the complete picture is
very important.

>> Since it is now very clearly a
>> link, it is indeed possible for developers to experiment with buttons
>> or other interaction mechanisms on the video player if they want to.
>> So, I think it meets the requirement that you're posing.
> Yes, it does indeed.

Well, this is what I care about. :-)

How about others? Ted? Eric? Janina? Chaals? Are we going to have
another media subgroup meeting this week to discuss our progress?
Should I adapt the task force CP accordingly?

Received on Friday, 8 June 2012 08:04:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:28 UTC