W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org > October 2012

RE: Closed non-embedded content???

From: Hoffman, Allen <Allen.Hoffman@HQ.DHS.GOV>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 13:08:07 +0000
To: "Bailey, Bruce" <Bailey@Access-Board.gov>, Loďc Martínez Normand <loic@fi.upm.es>, Michael Pluke <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com>
CC: "public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org" <public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9F7B0040F7A7C4428E160959229DE9F31006940A@D2ASEPRSH127.DSA.DHS>
DRM is an access rights function, which is perfectly acceptable when it functions correctly and doesn't by default restrict accessibility even for information the user should have access to.  DRM should be separated from the concept of closed as restricted content may be inaccessible for users who don't have rights, but must be accessible in terms of accessibility for any who do have rights.  Closed nonembedded content is a small set of the overall set of content definitely, and I think DRM must be a specific subject of it's own to allow for clear understanding of the concepts.  There is a lot of activity of late in the big data arena regarding moving the attributes for data towards inclusion of access rights so that a more unified DRM can be performed, even as an inline function within network architectures.  This leads me to think that we need to put authentication/access rights in a category of its own.  So that begs the question of what's left for close nonembedded content?  Here are some questions that might help find some more examples.

1.  If you have content which is not restricted by DRM, but for which no user agent exists which provide accessibility, is that closed nonembedded content?
2.  If you have content explicitly destined for specific IT environments for presentation, and those environments are explicitly closed, is that then closed nonembedded content?


-----Original Message-----
From: Bailey, Bruce [mailto:Bailey@Access-Board.gov] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 8:54 AM
To: Loďc Martínez Normand; Michael Pluke
Cc: public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org
Subject: RE: Closed non-embedded content???

MP>> So it would be ideal to have an example of non-Web non-embedded content other than the contentious issue of DRM.

I appreciate that, but DRM is but one example of "closed by policy", which I would argue is the larger problem.

LM> As for an example for non-web non-embedded content with closed functionality, I still think we can use the example of a document with a "speech output = no" flag without saying that this is related to DRM.

I agree with this, but I have some concerned that as why such a flag would be set begs for an explanation.  We could cite the real world example where Kindle deactivated their text-to-speech function because authors successfully litigated that they had not given been compensated for audio performances.  This is closed by policy, but not DRM per se.  The difficulty is that this situation is even more absurd than DRM, and DRM already seems plenty absurd to most folks when they think about it!

In any case, an eBook file still stands as an example of non-Web non-embedded content which could (and historically have been) closed non-embedded content.
Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2012 13:08:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:17:47 UTC