W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2002

RE: Rebroadcasts

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 14:35:08 -0400 (EDT)
To: Paul Bohman <paulb@cpd2.usu.edu>
cc: <GV@trace.wisc.edu>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0206181426320.18606-100000@tux.w3.org>

On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, Paul Bohman wrote:

  As a clarification, captions made in SMIL or SAMI for media players are
  inherently more legible than the captions that come second-hand through
  non-web broadcasts. SMIL and SAMI captions can be as legible as any real
  text on the person's computer. Captions that are a part of rebroadcasts
  often end up being pixilated, blocky, and blurry.

I have two reservations about this. One is the technical one identified by

The other is that it is unmeasurable as it gives no guideance as to what
standards might be applicable. Is it fair to claim, for example, that some
rebroadcast audio complied to the accessibility standard for Fighter Pilot
commmunication with their controllers and therefore needs no captioning?
Does this apply to a legal requirement that has been met or to some defined
requirements for ensuring accessibility?

Charles McCN
Received on Tuesday, 18 June 2002 14:35:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:41 UTC