[hcg] Minutes 2010-06-04

http://www.w3.org/2010/06/04-hcg-minutes.html

As text:


    [1]W3C

       [1] http://www.w3.org/

                                - DRAFT -

               Hypertext Coordination Group Teleconference
                               04 Jun 2010

    [2]Agenda

       [2]  
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-html-cg/2010AprJun/0082.html

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2010/06/04-hcg-irc

Attendees

    Present
           Janina, Debbie_Dahl, ChrisL, Doug_Schepers, Steven,
           Lofton_Henderson, darobin, Plh, Bert

    Regrets
           Daniel_Glazman

    Chair
           Chris

    Scribe
           Steven

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]Actions items
          2. [6]Media Accessibility Requirements
          3. [7]AOB
      * [8]Summary of Action Items
      _________________________________________________________

    <trackbot> Date: 04 June 2010

    <ChrisL>
    [9]http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/34315/HCG2010telcon/results

       [9] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/34315/HCG2010telcon/results

    <scribe> Scribe: Steven

Actions items

    <ChrisL> action-32?

    <trackbot> ACTION-32 -- Deborah Dahl to find someone to follow up on
    scxml implementations from KDE -- due 2010-05-14 -- OPEN

    <trackbot> [10]http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/CoordGroup/track/actions/32

      [10] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/CoordGroup/track/actions/32

    Debbie: The Voice browser WG keeps a list
    ... and that summarises all implementations
    ... action closed

    <ChrisL> [11]http://www.w3.org/Voice/#imp-scxml

      [11] http://www.w3.org/Voice/#imp-scxml

    Debbie: Also, it came up that they might like to present scxml to
    the HCG

    <ChrisL> s/@@/SCXML/

    Debbie: Interested? July 16th or Aug 13

    Shepazu: There is a joint TF with SVG

    Debbie: I was talking about HCG not SVG

    Shepazu: Sorry!

    Chris: Yes, why not?

    Shepazu: SVG is interested in SCXML in the context of animation

    Debbie: Email them
    ... Let's use July 16th for the presentation

Media Accessibility Requirements

    <ChrisL>
    [12]http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_Accessibility_Requireme
    nts

      [12]  
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_Accessibility_Requirements

    <janina>
    [13]http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_Accessibility_Requireme
    nts

      [13]  
http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Media_Accessibility_Requirements

    <ddahl> Jim Barnett is the editor, Jim Larson is the chair and
    Kazuyuki is the Activity Lead

    Janina: this is in process, mostly complete
    ... running a survey on it

    <janina>
    [14]http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/44061/20080526_media-requirements/
    results

      [14]  
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/44061/20080526_media-requirements/results

    Janina: Trying to collect user requirements for accessibility for
    audio and video
    ... how much do we expect from HTML5 is the question
    ... If HTML5 becomes the next media platform then accessibility
    requirements are large
    ... we need to provide for the chance that it gets significant use

    Chris: Are these public minutes?

    +1

    Chris: Yes they are

    <ChrisL> minutes will be public

    Janina: Since we weren't making progress in accessibility, then just
    looking at captioning and subtitling isn't sufficient (that is audio
    description and video description)

    <ChrisL> suggest the difference between captioning and subtitles be
    explained

    Janina: So we need a full user survey of what it would take
    ... and be as thorough as possible
    ... to get all user requirements
    ... leading to technical requirements
    ... which are MUSTs and which SHOULDs, conformance, authoring, etc
    ... The document is a mess in terms of English Language at present
    ... needs cleaning up
    ... result of many (wiki) authors
    ... we are nearly there with user requirements
    ... about to start on technical requirements
    ... most of what is here has been well vetted and implemented
    ... The first section is an overview
    ... section 2 is types of technology
    ... there are rules in captioning about which information is useful
    ... describing what you could see, and is essential to understanding
    ... there are movie theatres equipped with this
    ... and hear a track with audio description
    ... When it was first introduced for TV, people stopped me on the
    street to tell me about it
    ... used on TV
    ... then Texted audio description
    ... then extended descritpion
    ... for instance for lectures; you would pause the video, and listen
    to the extended description
    ... Next is clear audio, for people with hearing disabilities (not
    deafness)

    <shepazu> [I would benefit from this, I think]

    [Scribe not scribing things that are in the doc, other than titles]

    Chris: This is a new way of presenting the audio? No requirement
    that all media is clear?

    Janina: Correct
    ... next, Structured content navigation
    ... books replaced scrolls, and therefore introduced new types of
    content structuring
    ... probably new media will have a similar effect
    ... DAISY working in this field
    ... there are examples of books where you don't start necessarily at
    the beginning
    ... (eg cookbooks)
    ... therefore forward and rewind/next and previous can be useful
    ... and it is good to be able to control the granularity of forward
    and back
    ... next, captioning for the deaf and very hard of hearing
    ... mandated in the US since 1988
    ... good spillover into mainstream use, such as in noisy bars
    ... similar to subtitles
    ... but subtitles are translations
    ... captioning also captures sounds like gunshots
    ... which might be annoying in subtitles
    ... There may be more space needed for captioning than the timeline
    allows
    ... therefore you need extended captions

    Shepazu: You could use the same mechanism, with different levels, is
    that what you mean?

    Janina: Yes
    ... this is my idea, not subject to consensus yet
    ... Next, Sign Translation
    ... someone on screen waving their arms
    ... problems with the difference between different regional signing
    ... Next, transcripts
    ... suggested by Microsoft
    ... Next, System Requirements
    ... keyboard access
    ... don't require a pointer
    ... next, Granularity Level Control for Structural Navigation, which
    I discussed earlier
    ... next, Time Scale Modification, comes from DAISY
    ... adjusting playback speed
    ... I think slowing things down will be a mainstream hit
    ... for instance for people living in language environments that are
    not their mother tongue.
    ... Production practice
    ... mainly authoring, no spec effects
    ... Discovery and activation
    ... for alternative content
    ... use of the viewport
    ... for swapping between media
    ... parallel use of alternate content on potentially multiple
    devices in parallel
    ... and that's about it
    ... glad to hear of things we forgot

    Shepazu: Seem to be good cases, I appreciate it

    Janina: Next steps, MUSTs and SHOULDs and tech requirements
    ... some parts may need SMIL2
    ... other parts OK in current browsers
    ... small devices are an interesting case
    ... might be "if you support this, then you must do this"

    Shepazu: Have you looked at IPTV, and set-top boxes like Google TV?

    Janina: I do refer to it

    <shepazu> s/things like GOogle TV?/IPTV, and set-top boxes like
    Google TV?/

    Janina: I think this is a major opportunity to get good
    accessibility in the future
    ... there is a refresh going on to 508, about use in the government
    and public-facing websites
    ... and another for telephones and TVs
    ... not sure if it covers the internet
    ... logins may be required, but maybe not content

    Shepazu: Have you reached out to companies who do these things, to
    see if they want to participate, and have you looked at IP issues?

    Janina: Royalty-free should be OK
    ... not sure about clear audio
    ... we have engaged companies, like DAISY

    Shepazu: Getting the right people involved provides a strong
    argument

    Janina: We may not have enough involvement on API issues

    Shepazu: IPTV people, like Samsung; Philips; Google TV, settop boxes
    makers, video games consoles, they don't need to be Web people per
    se, but could benefit from the tech

    Janina: Good suggestions
    ... We complained about Web SRT, because it didn't have consensus

    Shepazu: I think that Google TV will be a friend of yours

    plh: Prioritization?

    Janina: not the right course. Boil the user reqs to tech reqs, and
    then decide on MUST, SHOULD, conditional, etc
    ... it must be in the spec first

    Shepazu: You might consider developing the formats rather than
    simply providing a guideline spec, so we can get RF licenses on
    MUSTs, and so it is clearer to implementers what they should do

    Janina: Many we have already
    ... the question is whether we need SMIL2 or can we do it with less.
    ... If something is a SHOULD, maybe we can rely on plugin
    technologies
    ... few pieces of content will have all alternatives

    Chris: Please tell the story about progressive use of accessibility
    stuff rather than all-or-nothing

    Janina: Good point

    Chris: Great run through document, thanks!

AOB

    Shepazu: The audio incubator group has launched
    ... please contact me for details

    Robin: Privacy workshop in London mid July, position papers are due
    Monday
    ... please submit!

    <shepazu> [15]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/audio/wiki

      [15] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/audio/wiki

    <shepazu> [16]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/audio/

      [16] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/audio/

    [ADJOURN]

Summary of Action Items

    [End of minutes]
      _________________________________________________________

Received on Friday, 4 June 2010 15:53:04 UTC