W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2004

Associating text alternatives with multimedia (was: RE: Great call. Great progress on 1.1) We missed one item.

From: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 08:47:55 -0500
Message-ID: <C46A1118E0262B47BD5C202DA2490D1A03317DD7@MAIL02.austin.utexas.edu>
To: "Gregg Vanderheiden" <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, "Joe Clark" <joeclark@joeclark.org>, "WAI-GL" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

Responding to Gregg's response to Joe's question about 1.1 L1 SC 1.c.

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Gregg Vanderheiden
Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 4:30 pm
To: 'Joe Clark'; 'WAI-GL'
Subject: RE: Great call. Great progress on 1.1 We missed one item.



Hmmmm

That is a good question Joe.  And a good catch.     

Providing the title doesn't sound hard.  It will either be a link which
would usually be the title or it would be an icon or image - so that the
title could be alt text.  There has to be something that tells everyone
what it is - unless it is a mystery - in which case it can be covered by
scoping. But a description would not be easy to include - esp. if it was
a link.  
As I understand it, the problem isn't so much how to "include" a text
description of a multimedia object, but how to create an explicit
association between the description and the multimedia object. The alt
and longdesc attributes serve this purpose for <img> elements, of course
(though as far as I know it isn't possible to attach a longdesc to a
graphical link, because pressing the Enter key activates the link rather
than bringing up the description); and so the d-link can work too.  But 

But is there a way to create an association in the other direction--
that is, to associate a paragraph with a particular image or other
element (Something like, <p describes="workofart.jpg">Yatta yatta</p>)?
Is this something that RDF can do? (This could also be useful when
providing visual illustrations to clarify a complex concept or process.)
And if the answer to that question is yes, are there any existing user
agents that support it? Or do we get right back to Joe's point about
lack of support for the <object> element?


Perhaps we should just add [another success criterion] so that it reads.


c)  For non-text content that is intended to create a specific sensory
experience, such as music without words or visual art, text alternatives
identify and describe the non-text content.

d)  For multimedia where link or invocation is non-text, text
alternatives identify the multimedia and multimedia alternatives are
provided per Guideline 1.2.

"Invocation"? As in O, Lord, please let this problem go away?<grin>


I don't like this particularly well - but can't think of anything else
right now. And we need to get multimedia off of needing text alternative
at L1. Whether it should be required at any level (currently at L3) is
an open question - but there is no question it should not be at L1. 

The text document that's called for at L3 seems to me like a "text
alternative" to the media equivalents that are required by 1.2.
Presumably, this document would include text transcripts of the audio
descriptions as well as the text of the captions-- both now in a format
that can be accessed by people using refreshable Braille displays.  If
we require it at all, it's definitely a Level 3; but it probably belongs
under 1.2, since it's a special form of the media equivalents required
there. 

Other suggestions?
Another possibility might be to mention it in General Techniques as a
special case, but leaving it at Level 3 has the possible benefit of
allowing content providers to include it in conformance statements.

John
Gregg

PS  I also added a fix John pointed out (it should, and now does, say
music without words). 


 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 


-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Joe Clark
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 1:22 PM
To: WAI-GL
Subject: Re: Great call. Great progress on 1.1 We missed one item.


> C)  For MULTIMEDIA AND non-text content that is intended to create a 
> specific sensory experience, such as music or visual art, text 
> alternatives identify and describe the non-text content.

I'd like someone to explain how I can use a text equivalent in HTML for
a 
multimedia file-- other than using <object>, which is poorly supported.


-- 

    Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
    Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/>
    Expect criticism if you top-post
Received on Monday, 28 June 2004 09:47:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:30 GMT