W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2000


From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 12:38:35 +1100 (EST)
To: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.10.10009061236420.2691-100000@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
A regular Web Content Guidelines working group meeting will be held on
Thursday at 20 hours Coordinated Universal Time (4 PM Boston, 10 PM
France, now 7 AM in Eastern Australia due to a recent change of time

Questions to be considered during the meeting:

A. Principle 1: Does guideline 1.1 need to be clarified specifically to
include metadata? Can it too easily be misconstrued as excluding it, given
the historical usage surrounding the term "text equivalent" in WCAG 1.0?

Current wording: "1.1 Provide a textual equivalent for every non-text
(auditory or graphical) component or multimedia presentation."

Do you favour Andi's suggested restatement of the guidelines under
Principle 1, namely:

1.1 Provide a description for each image.
1.2 Provide a transcript for audio content.
1.3 Provide synchronized captions of the audio portion of a multimedia
presentation if it is required for understanding. Otherwise, provide a
transcript of the audio. For example, an animated tutorial video with audio
descriptions of the animation should provide synchronized text captions.
For a simple video of a person giving a speech, it is sufficient to provide
a text transcript of the speech.
1.4 Provide synchronized audio descriptions of the video portion of a
multimedia presentation if is is required for understanding. For example, a
video of a classroom lecture should provide synchronized audio descriptions
of visual materials used that are not described in the lecture audio. A
video of a person giving a speech does not require an audio description.

B. Principle 2: Does William's proposed introduction provide an appropriate
explanation of this principle and the guidelines which have been placed
under it? How could his exposition be improved? Is such an introduction
adequate to promote understanding of the document among web content
developers who, though well acquainted with the technology, do not have
prior knowledge of the principles and concepts of accessible design?

C. Principle 3 (deleted from latest draft): Under some circumstances it may
be necessary for the author to provide more than simply a marked up document
or a data model. Concretely, a style sheet, programmatic object,
transformation procedure or other infrastructure may be required in order to
enable the user agent effectively to process and render the content in the
user's preferred modality. How should this issue be addressed in the

D. Principle 4: some of these requirements need to be expressed more
precisely and in greater detail. Are there any volunteers?precisely and in
greater detail. Do you have any suggestions?

E. Any other action items or issues raised by working group members may also
be discussed.
Received on Tuesday, 5 September 2000 21:40:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:33 UTC