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

RE: Level 3 success criteria for checkpoint 1.2 (UPDATED per discussion at 11/7 meeting)

From: Paul Bohman <paulb@cpd2.usu.edu>
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 10:57:28 -0700
To: "'Andi Snow-Weaver'" <andisnow@us.ibm.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000f01c28750$4da41e90$ef117b81@Spot>

The concerns that Joe brought up about simultaneous captions and other
visual content are valid concerns. Most of the time, captions can be
viewed at the same time as the other events on the screen without too
much difficulty, especially with practice.

There are some cases where there may be some legitimate conflicts. For
example, if the screen shows a lengthy list of sports scores at the same
time that a voice in the background is explaining something (and not
just reading the text on the screen), this could be difficult to follow.
The viewer's attention would be divided between the captions and the
other text on the screen.

Still, as Joe pointed out, the norm right now for captioning would be to
allow the captioning to proceed even if there is a potential visual
conflict, requiring the viewer to pay attention to both the captions and
the other visual elements simultaneously. It would be difficult for the
WAI to require that all broadcasts be adapted from their original format
to insert pauses where there may be a conflict with captioning and other
visual elements. And it would be impossible to implement such pauses in
live broadcasts. In fact, to truly implement this success criterion,
directors, actors and script writers would have to change their
procedures. The chef (to use the example from the previous message)
would have to change her behavior. She would have to make sure that she
explains nothing while performing the actions, and that she fully
explains the actions either before or after performing them.

But, as it stands right now, this is a Level 3 success criterion.
Captioners would not be required to implement this technique at either
the Minimum level or Level 2. Maybe we are justified in keeping this
success criterion based on that fact alone, however...

The real question is whether such a technique would be beneficial to
users with disabilities. The user group that may benefit most may be
those with cognitive disabilities, but this is just a guess. I don't
personally know of any research in this area (though it may exist) which
suggests that it would be better to not provide captions while something
important is happening elsewhere on the screen. If research exists, and
if this conclusion is accurate, then it would be wise to keep this
success criterion in the guidelines at Level 3. If there is no body of
research in that area, or if the research is inconclusive, I would
recommend removing the success criterion.

I say this because I can imagine one set of experts arguing that it is
actually *better* to provide the explanation simultaneously with the
demonstration (as in the chef example). I tend to think that it would be
better for me if the visual demonstration and the verbal explanation
occurred at the same time, even if it does require me to view captions
and the visual demonstration simultaneously. I haven't researched this
myself. I am only postulating, but if no one else has any solid research
either, it may be better to leave this one out of the guidelines.

Paul Bohman
Technology Coordinator
WebAIM (Web Accessibility in Mind)
www.webaim.org
Center for Persons with Disabilities
www.cpd.usu.edu
Utah State University
www.usu.edu 


-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Andi Snow-Weaver
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 10:19 AM
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Re: Level 3 success criteria for checkpoint 1.2 (UPDATED per
discussion at 11/7 meeting)



Amended as per discussion at yesterday's call:

Level 3 success criteria

3. The presentation does not require the user to view captions and the
visual presentation simultaneously in order to understand the content.

and the modified informative example would be...

A cooking video shows a chef preparing a recipe. The chef describes the
ingredients and the process for each step and then performs the step. In
this manner, deaf users can read the voice captions first and then watch
the demonstration.

Andi
andisnow@us.ibm.com
IBM Accessibility Center
(512) 838-9903, http://www.ibm.com/able
Internal Tie Line 678-9903, http://w3.austin.ibm.com/~snsinfo
Received on Friday, 8 November 2002 12:57:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:20 GMT