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

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

From: Liddy Nevile <liddy@sunriseresearch.org>
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 20:09:19 +1000
Cc: "Andy Heath" <andyheath@axelrod.plus.com>, "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>, "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: <E5D0CCF1-9C7A-4721-AE3E-E9D233BBE336@sunriseresearch.org>
To: "Charles McCathie Nevile" <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
I have always understood that the accessMode records what is essential  
to get the full content of the resource  otherwise what would be that?

Liddy

On 08/09/2013, at 11:45 PM, Charles McCathie Nevile wrote:

> 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: <http://www.a11ymetadata.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/A11yMetadataProjectBestPracticesGuide_V.6.pdf 
> >
>
>> 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
>
> Indeed.
>
> 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 user.
>
>> 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 10:12:26 UTC

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