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

Re: ISSUE-194: full-transcript - Chairs Solicit Alternate Proposals or Counter-Proposals

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 15:02:54 +0000
Message-ID: <CA+ri+Vna3g--uENPfLXMMew_T5PgWWdGVn7PTbVNCXZEg4aaLA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Cc: Sean Hayes <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Hi Chaals,

you wrote:

"Not necessarily. There is a deep issue I have with ARIA, about claiming
that it is only for "assistive technology" and thereby *assuming* it won't
be implemented or wanted as native functionality in browsers. I think this
assumption is demonstrably wrong (among other things a lot of aria
functionality was developed to run directly in browsers)."

As stated in the WAI-ARIA spec and re-iterated in the HTML5 spec (against
hixie's wishes, so not in HTML the living standard
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/elements.html#wai-aria
)

"The WAI-ARIA specification neither requires or forbids user agents from
enhancing native presentation and interaction behaviors on the basis of
WAI- ARIA markup. Even mainstream user agents might choose to expose
metadata or navigational features directly or via user-installed
extensions; for example, exposing required form fields or landmark
navigation. User agents are encouraged to maximize their usefulness to
users, including users without disabilities."

source:http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/wai-aria.html#wai-aria

best regards
Stevef

On 15 March 2012 14:50, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 12:27:53 +0100, Silvia Pfeiffer <
> silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  This is a good discussion.
>>
>
> Yep.
>
>
>  On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 9:01 PM, Sean Hayes <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I am not sure that these are necessarily the same thing at all. A
>>> transcript is IMO a static untimed merged representation of the information
>>> in in the caption and description tracks. A longdesc would probably be
>>> something more along the lines of a synopsis or prÚcis. I think we need
>>> mechanisms that can handle both of these use cases.
>>>
>>
>> A summary is metadata and more than the sighted get if it's hidden in
>> a such a field.
>>
>
> That depends. You don't have to be blind to get the longdesc for images
> from Opera, even if it is sitting on another page. Indeed, curently in
> Opera sighted people have more ways than blind people to get value out of
> longdesc. I don't think that is a problem either way (although more
> generally we should be doing better for blind users).
>
>
>  It would be a problem if we encouraged such
>> publication approaches. Such text should be recommended to be
>> published as on-page text and referenced with aria-describedby.
>>
>
> Not necessarily. There is a deep issue I have with ARIA, about claiming
> that it is only for "assistive technology" and thereby *assuming* it won't
> be implemented or wanted as native functionality in browsers. I think this
> assumption is demonstrably wrong (among other things a lot of aria
> functionality was developed to run directly in browsers).
>
>
>  I agree that it makes sense to wait and see how the discussion on generic
>>> 'off page text' pans out; it might be for example that we end up with both
>>> an attribute and an element e.g. @longdesc and <longdesc> (following the
>>> precedent of @src and <source>) where the latter admits a richer set of
>>> adornments, possibly including some sort of role attribute which can
>>> distinguish between a transcript and a synopsis, amongst other uses for
>>> off-page text.
>>>
>>
>> Do I understand correctly that this is a suggestion to allow several
>> long description documents to be associated to a video? Do you have
>> use cases? Why would video need something like this an no other
>> element?
>>
>
> I don't think video is the only element that might need this, but I think
> Sean provides, above, a use case for at least two different long
> description documents...
>
> cheers
>
> --
> Charles 'chaals' McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
>    je parle franšais -- hablo espa˝ol -- jeg kan litt norsk
> http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
>
>


-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG

www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com |
www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner
HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/
Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Received on Thursday, 15 March 2012 15:03:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:30 UTC