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

Re: [a11y-metadata-project] Re: Schema.org accessibility proposal Review...

From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2013 13:45:20 -0000
To: "Andy Heath" <andyheath@axelrod.plus.com>
Cc: "a11y-metadata-project@googlegroups.com" <a11y-metadata-project@googlegroups.com>, "<public-vocabs@w3.org>" <public-vocabs@w3.org>, "Gerardo Capiel" <gerardoc@benetech.org>, "Dan Brickley" <danbri@google.com>, "Alexander Shubin" <ajax@yandex-team.ru>, "Egor Antonov" <elderos@yandex-team.ru>, "Liddy Nevile" <liddy@sunriseresearch.org>, "Charles Myers" <charlesm@benetech.org>, "Richard Schwerdtfeger" <schwer@us.ibm.com>, "George Kerscher" <kerscher@montana.com>, "Jason Johnson" <jasjoh@microsoft.com>, "Matt Garrish" <matt.garrish@bell.net>
Message-ID: <op.w226purry3oazb@chaals.local>
On Sat, 07 Sep 2013 12:49:32 -0000, Andy Heath  
<andyheath@axelrod.plus.com> wrote:

> Chaals quoted (and wrote a little bit of):
>>>> = accessMode =
>>>> It should be possible for a "single resource" to be available with
>>>> more than one *set* of accessModes.
>>> I agree and this is the design.  A single resource can require one or
>>> more accessMode(s).
>> Yes, but...
>>> … the accessMode property describes "Human sensory perceptual system
>>> or cognitive faculty through which a person may process or perceive
>>> information." […]
>>> We have also published a best practices and an implementation guide on
>>> the use of accessMode at:
>>> <http://www.a11ymetadata.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/A11yMetadataProjectBestPracticesGuide_V.6.pdf>
>>> <https://wiki.benetech.org/display/a11ymetadata/Practical+Properties+Guide>
> Chaals wrote:
>> Yep. But that has an example which I'll use:
>> A movie with captions and extended audio description would be encoded as
>> follows
>> <div itemscope=”” itemtype=”http://schema.org/Movie”>
>> <meta itemprop=”accessMode” content=”visual”/>
>> <meta itemprop=”accessMode” content=”auditory”/>
>> <meta itemprop=”mediaFeature” content=”audioDescription”/>
>> <meta itemprop=”mediaFeature” content=”captions”/>
>> </div>
>> My first impression is that if the video has good audio description,
>> then claiming it has accessMode "visual" seems wrong, since you don't
>> need to see it. Likewise, since it is captioned, it seems you don't need
>> to hear it.
>> So it doesn't have a single *required* accessMode. On the other hand,
>> you need to *either* see (clearly enough) or hear, in order to get the
>> content.
> The interpretation we had in AfA 3.0 of each property like this was that  
> each specified not "accessMode required" but instead "accessMode  
> available".  Did this project take a different interpretation ?

I got that impression by reading the best practices guide Gerardo pointed  
to above:  

> I haven't yet read the rest of this because I'm trying to focus on the  
> same ISO meeting Chaals is in (but will do so) - this interpretation is  
> so crucial as to change the whole emphasis


On the other hand, if we don't take the view that an accessMode is  
required, I dont understand the logic that lets us match a resource to a  

> so I wanted to reply quickly on this one point.
> andy
> axelrod access for all
> DiversityNet
> http://axelafa.com

Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
       chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Sunday, 8 September 2013 09:46:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:30 UTC