RE: 1.2.5 is ambiguous

Actually,

Now that I think about it intent was to be both.  But we never wrote it
anywhere.   And your analysis Bruce is right on target.  

 My question was whether we had to do it in the WCAG somewhere or whether we
could just do it in the HTM.  

How about we leave it as is and just put a sentence in HTM so it is clear it
wasn't accidental.  

 

But first we need to run it past the full group in case people don't
remember or in case they care. 


Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
The Player for my DSS sound file is at http://tinyurl.com/dho6b
<http://tinyurl.com/cmfd9>  

 

 


  _____  


From: public-wcag-teama-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-wcag-teama-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Bailey, Bruce
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 10:58 AM
To: public-wcag-teama@w3.org
Subject: RE: 1.2.5 is ambiguous

I had assumed that in 1.2.5 multimedia deliberately meant both.  But then I
was moderately surprised that the captioning and Audio Description
requirements had been broken into live and pre-recorded SC.  This worked out
to be quite fortuitous as the discussion developed later on Level
assignments for the associated SC.

 

Unless there is serious consideration of promoting 1.2.5 to Level 2 it is
not clear to me that there is any reason to divide it into two SC (one for
live, one for pre-recorded).

 

I disagree with the characterization that real world implementation of 1.2.5
is rare.  For the U.S. Federal government, there is already the requirement
to provide sign language interpretation for live events (multimedia, per our
definition, if the live events are broadcast) as essentially a Level 1
requirement for 504 (not 508).  The SC, as written, provides for the
situation where human sign language interpreters are used at the point of
delivery.  Like other agencies, we routinely make use of IPTV for broadcasts
(over corporate intranet), typically from headquarters to the regions.  In
addition to live (open) captions (as part of the broadcast) sign language
interpreters are provided at headquarters and in the regions.  People have
the captions available at their desk, but one has to go to a conference room
to take advantage of the sign language interpretation.

 

Now, I don't think think the authors of the SC had our situation in mind
when they wrote 1.2.5, but I am quite pleased that, taken at face value, it
is directly applicable.  Somewhat ironically, sign language interpretation
of live multimedia is easier for us to achieve than for pre-recorded
multimedia.  (Exactly the opposite of the situation with captions and AD).

 

Anyway, my opinion is that we mean both, and that could be clarified, but
don't change the wording of the SC.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: public-wcag-teama-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-wcag-teama-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Li, Alex
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 10:48 AM
To: public-wcag-teama@w3.org
Subject: RE: 1.2.5 is ambiguous

Real world implementation of this sc would be extremely rare with or without
specification on live or pre-recorded multimedia.  I really don't think it
matters. 
 

 


  _____  


From: public-wcag-teama-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-wcag-teama-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Gregg Vanderheiden
Sent: Friday, Jul 14, 2006 7:08 AM
To: public-wcag-teama@w3.org
Subject: 1.2.5 is ambiguous

1.2.5 reads

1.2.5 Sign language interpretation
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/appendixA.html#sign-languageinterpdef>  is
provided for multimedia
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/appendixA.html#multimediadef> . [How
<http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20060707/Overview.h
tml#media-equiv-sign>  to meet 1.2.5] 

 

For all other SC we say "pre-recorded" or "live"   

Do we mean both here?  

If so - where do we say that? 

Do we need to?

 

Can we just say in HTM that we didn't say pre recorded or live because in
this case we intended both?  

Did we? 


Gregg