W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > October 2013

Re: [a11y-metadata-project] Reminder of accessibility metadata call coming up in an hour (9:00 AM PDT)

From: Liddy Nevile <liddy@sunriseresearch.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 03:04:15 +1100
Cc: "a11y-metadata-project@googlegroups.com" <a11y-metadata-project@googlegroups.com>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-Id: <5662E7F4-5D6A-4821-835D-1602B53AC7A2@sunriseresearch.org>
To: Charles Myers <charlesm@benetech.org>
My comments...

Charles Nevile ...
Charles raised the question of whether these attributes are a  
declaration of conformance (as in alternativeText means that "all of  
the photographs and other media have alternate text") or just whether  
the author of the content (or adapted version of the content) used  
alternate text on the significant parts of the content to the best of  
their abilities. The intent of these are the latter. Since this  
metadata is being added by people who care about accessibility, we  
have to trust that they will apply their best efforts before they'd  
add the attribute.

It has long been a tradition in the DC world of metadata to assume  
that people have good intentions - they don't always, but those who do  
make it worthwhile trusting...

then there is a discussion about mediaFeature.... I am developing some  
fairly strong feelings baout this. First, I don't think 'mediaFeature'  
is anything like as good a name as accessFeature ' given that we are  
mostly describing things that are done to increase accessibility - and  
we have accessMode...  Then Jutta wanted us to add in 'adaptation' or  
the equivalnet. I think that a feature implies something special but  
taking Jutta's position it might be better to have them called  
accessAdaptation - ie for things like captions etc??? Certainly I  
would not want both feature and adaptation in a single name - that  
would be introducing redundancy, I think...

Next, I think the idea that we should label things because someone  
tried to fix it is absurd - to be honest. We are asking people to make  
assertions about the resource, or their needs, not to tell us how nice  
they are. An assertion, made in good faith, should mean that something  
has been achieved - eg alt tags for all images, etc ....

Next, I want us to be clear about accessMode. As Charles Nevile and I  
understand it, this will be a set of assertions that tell us what is  
the minimum complete set of accessModes that will convey all the  
content of a resource. So we might get visual + text, visual + audio,  
text, etc ... ie more than one statement. This can be done and it  
involves a trick - generally the value of RDF means that if I make an  
assertion and then you add another, both bits of info can be put  
together to make a richer statement. In this case, we certainly do not  
want that to happen! In RDF the merging of statements can be avoided  
by using what is known as a 'blank node'.
I am writing all this because I think  both being clear about the use  
of accessMode and knowing that it will work is really important :-)


On 23/10/2013, at 1:53 AM, Charles Myers wrote:

> I'm back and caught up on accessibility metadata from the calls of  
> two weeks ago.  The eganda for today's meeting cal be seen below and  
> at https://wiki.benetech.org/display/a11ymetadata/Next+Accessibility+Metadata+Meeting+Agenda
>
> I also wrote our minutes from the last two meetings at https://wiki.benetech.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=58853548 
>  and the issue tracker has been updated on the mediaFeature issue.http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Accessibility/Issues_Tracker#What_is_the_goal_of_mediaFeature.3F_.28conforming_or_informational.29_Do_we_have_this_right.3F
>
> Note that we have a new conference call number this week.  And we  
> will be back on a regular weekly schedule from this point on.
> October 22, 2013 Accessibility Metadata working group call
> Weekly Meeting
> Schedule: The next call will be Tuesday, October 22, 9:00am PDT  
> (California), 12:00am EDT (Ontario, New York), 5:00PM in London and  
> 6:00 PM on the continent, 3:00 AM in Australia
> Conference call: +1-866-906-9888 (US toll free), +1-857-288-2555  
> (international), Participant Code: 1850396#
> Etherpad: (10/22/2013)
> IRC: Freenode.net #a11ymetadata (although more of the collab seems  
> to happen in the etherpad)
> The goal of the call will be a review of the open issues on the w3c  
> wiki and get to closure on these issues and work these with  
> schema.org representatives.  See issues and accessMode/mediaFeature  
> matrix. There will also be a discussion of the use of these  
> attributes for search, as shown in the blog article.
>
> The next call will be October 22 and then will settle into weekly  
> meetings as required.
>
> The public site is http://www.a11ymetadata.org/ and our twitter  
> hashtag is #a11ymetadata.
>
> Overall Agenda
> New Business - We will start discussing this promptly at the top of  
> the hour.
>
> 	 mediaFeature - our goal is to get agreement on the mediaFeature  
> properties, as noted in the issue list.  As noted in the last call's  
> minutes, we did a deep dive into visual and textual transform  
> features last time. I've editted the list down to reflect both new  
> properties that we decided on last time and some of the  
> simplifications that come with the extension mechanism. I'd like to  
> reach a conclusion on those, both for the specific names but also  
> for the general framework, so that one can see the extension  
> mechanism.  I'd like to propose even that we segment this discussion  
> into two parts... agreement on the current properties and then  
> consideration of new properties (I want to see the discussion make  
> progress)
> 		 transformFeature - do we mike that name (against the "content  
> feature")
> 			 Finish discussion on visualTransformFeature and  
> textualTransformFeature
> 			 Consider auditoryTransformFeature (structural Navigation will  
> be covered in textualTransform) and tactileTransform
> 		 Review contentFeature side of the mediaFeatures starting from  
> the proposed table in the issues list
> 			 textual (note the removal of desacribedMath) - alternativeText,  
> captions, chemML, laTex, longDescription, mathML, transcript
> 			 tactile (note the simplication of braille to be the extended  
> form) - braille, tactileGraphic, tactileObject
> 			 auditory - audiDescription
> 			 visual - signLanguage, captions/open
> 	 ATCompatible
> 	 ControlFlexibility and accessAPI (we'll be lucky if we get to  
> this point)
> 	 accessMode and the three proposals for the available access modes  
> (this is a topic for a future call)
> 	 is/hasAdaptation
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
> Groups "Accessibility Metadata Project" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
> send an email to a11y-metadata-project+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to a11y-metadata-project@googlegroups.com 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Received on Tuesday, 29 October 2013 16:04:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:32 UTC