W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2008

Re: Acessibility of <audio> and <video>

From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 21:58:46 +0200
Message-ID: <48B30EF6.3020502@malform.no>
To: "Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd)" <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
CC: Dave Singer <singer@apple.com>, Justin James <j_james@mindspring.com>, 'HTML WG' <public-html@w3.org>

Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd) 2008-08-25 21.07:

> Dave Singer wrote:
> 
>> Note that the current design does allow for fall-back content.
> 

> Yes, but according to Anne v. K., that (in the current editor's
> draft of the specification), fallback can be reached only if
> the browser itself does not support <video> (or <audio>), 


Actually, I would correct Dave: While <video>/<audio> supports 
some kind of fallback, the draft says that this isn't its purpose:

	" it is intended for older Web browsers which do not support 
video, so that legacy video plugins can be tried, or to show text 
to the users of these older browser informing them of how to 
access the video contents. Note: In particular, this content is 
not fallback content intended to address accessibility concerns." [1]

So, it is more to be compared with the <noframes> element, which 
HTML 4 intended for giving links to the different frames 
(allthough it more commonly is used to say "sorry, but your 
browser doesn't support frames".)

[1] 
http://whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/video.html	
-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Monday, 25 August 2008 19:59:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:22 GMT