W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-annotation@w3.org > June 2011

Re: Checked metadata examples and RDF files

From: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 09:09:01 +0200
Message-ID: <4DFEF20D.6050201@w3.org>
To: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
CC: public-media-annotation@w3.org
John,


Please keep in mind that the coloring is only meant for tracking the 
status of advancement of the files: errors validation. In a few days or 
couple weeks all this coloring will be removed in the final Testsuite as 
files will all be error free.


To clarify, we are not using "red / green / yellow" coloring of text, we 
are using a CSS class for each type of files, and then define a screen 
layout for each class.

<td><span class="invalid"><span class="valid"> ...
<td><span class="invalid"><span class="invalid"> ...

An aural CSS style sheet could highlight these files category for people 
with visual impairments.

I agree that for a document meant for the public wide consumption, your 
markup [V] / [NV] / [CV] would me more appropriate.

I can guaranty that this document, when finalized will not incorporate 
these colorings in the final testsuite.

Thierry




Le 17/06/2011 17:17, John Foliot a écrit :
> Hello Thierry,
>
> As a long-time lurker on this list, and as a member of the WAI gang (and a
> current co-chair of the A11yTF of HTML5), I just wanted to make note that
> using color alone here is problematic for many users of various types of
> visual impairment - certainly any blind user will be completely shut out,
> but also any user who has color-blindness may be affected, with red/green
> color blindness the most common type of this condition there is
> (http://www.colblindor.com/2010/03/16/red-green-color-blindness/).
> Finally, the contrast colors of the "red" category (the blue hyperlinks on
> red background) are likely insufficient in contrast for some low-vision
> users.
>
> What I might suggest instead is to use some other form of visual notation
> key to track the status of the various work products. For example, rather
> than using red / green / yellow you could append each item with something
> like [V] / [NV] / [CV] for Validated, Not Validated, and Cannot Validate,
> such as:
>
> <tr>
>   <td>Cablelabs_RDF [V]</td>
>   <td>Cablelabs_TTL [V]</td>
>   <td>Cablelabbs ADI 1.1 Example [NV]</td>
> </tr>
>
> If there is a desire to continue to use color, you may still do so (watch
> your foreground/background contrast), but relying on color *alone* is a
> contradiction/contravention of W3C's WCAG2 Recommendations, and I think we
> would all agree that the W3C should be eating its own dog-food, yes? If I
> can assist in any way in helping with remediation please do not hesitate
> to let me know - I would be happy to help.
>
> Cheers!
>
> JF
> ============================
> John  Foliot
> Program Manager
> Stanford Online Accessibility Program
> http://soap.stanford.edu
> Stanford University
> Tel: 650-468-5785
>
> ---
> Co-chair - W3C HTML5 Accessibility Task Force (Media)
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Main_Page
>
> ============================
>
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [mailto:public-media-
>> annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Thierry MICHEL
>> Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 5:01 AM
>> To: Evain, Jean-Pierre
>> Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: Checked metadata examples and RDF files
>>
>>
>> Jean Pierre,
>>
>>
>> OK I get it now, the email was missing the color for the wrong 'green'
>> text as in the HTML page .
>>
>> Please read:
>>
>> Files marked in green are validated (RDF validated, XML well formed or
>> TTL valid)
>> Files marked in red are not valid (RDF invalid, XML not well formed or
>> TTL invalid))
>> Files marked in yellow can not be validated (binary files for example).
>>
>>
>> I must be the Daltonian ...
>>
>> Thierry
>>
>> Le 17/06/2011 13:41, Evain, Jean-Pierre a écrit :
>>> All marked in green ;-) is one greener than the other?
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [mailto:public-media-
>> annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Thierry MICHEL
>>> Sent: vendredi, 17. juin 2011 11:55
>>> To: public-media-annotation@w3.org
>>> Subject: Checked metadata examples and RDF files
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I have check the multimedia metadata formats from the testsuite
>>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2008/WebVideo/Annotations/drafts/ontology10/testsuite
>> .html
>>>
>>> Status:
>>>
>>> - Files marked in green are validated (RDF validated or XML well
>> formed)
>>> - Files marked in green are not valid (RDF valid or XML not well
>> formed)
>>> - Files marked in green can not be validated (binary files for
>> example)
>>>
>>>
>>> Missing Files
>>> *************
>>>
>>> We are still missing the following RDF files
>>> MRSS
>>> TXF
>>> Flash
>>>
>>> RDF Files invalid
>>> *****************
>>> EXIF_RDF
>>> QT_RDF
>>> 3GP_RDF
>>> MP4_RDF
>>>
>>>
>>> XML Files invalid
>>> *****************
>>> Cablelabbs ADI 1.1 Example
>>> IPTC_Example (empty file) please resend JP.
>>> TXF_Example
>>>
>>> TTL Files invalid
>>> ******************
>>> EXIF_TTL
>>> QT_TTL
>>> 3GP_TTL
>>> MP4_TTL
>>>
>>>
>>> Please send me your validated files.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Note that the above only checks the syntax of the documents but not
>> the
>>> completeness of the properties.
>>>
>>> We will have to manually check these file and probably assign
>> reviewers.
>>>
>>> Thierry.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----------------------------------------
>>> **************************************************
>>> This email and any files transmitted with it
>>> are confidential and intended solely for the
>>> use of the individual or entity to whom they
>>> are addressed.
>>> If you have received this email in error,
>>> please notify the system manager.
>>> This footnote also confirms that this email
>>> message has been swept by the mailgateway
>>> **************************************************
>>>
>
>
Received on Monday, 20 June 2011 07:09:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:17:42 UTC