W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2005

RE: Background audio (was: Impact of not setting baseline and writing SC as functional outcomes)

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 13:04:08 -0600
To: "'Yvette P. Hoitink'" <y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20050401190408.BC2691CC3FC@m14.spamarrest.com>
Good point.

 

That section however wont be present in most all listings.  Also we talked
about moving them to GD. 

 

Lets work on content for now and not get lost on this.   We will have to
edit them all into the shortest form we can later that is understandable.
We may decide that they will all be cryptic but accurate  and let the GD
explain them.  Or we may decide that they all need to be basically
understandable - and this isn't the worst.   

 

We did this because people kept misunderstanding why.    They didn't even
think about screen readers so they said the person could just mute their
computer to avoid this problem.  

 


Gregg

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

 

 


  _____  


From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Yvette P. Hoitink
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 2:19 AM
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: Background audio (was: Impact of not setting baseline and
writing SC as functional outcomes)

Hi all,

 

John, I understand the need for an explanation but isn't that why we have a
'who benefits' section? I think our success criteria should be as concise as
possible and not contain any explanations or rationale.

 

I would like to go with Mike's suggestion:<proposed>"A mechanism is
available to turn off background audio that plays automatically.</proposed> 

and add the following to 'who benefits':

<proposed>

People who are blind or have low vision can use a screenreader without
having the background audio interfere.

People who have learning disabilities may find it easier to concentrate on
the content without background audio.

</proposed>

 

A real-world example example of a site that has this problem:
http://www.stichtingmeerzicht.nl/

This is a Dutch website of an organization that focuses on participation of
people with a visual impairment in the 'normal' society. However, their own
website does not follow the WCAG. On mouse over, the navigation buttons are
read aloud. In my browser, this is all scrambled and just goes on and on
until you mouse-out.


Yvette Hoitink
Heritas, Enschede, the Netherlands
E-mail: y.p.hoitink@heritas.nl
WWW: http://www.heritas.nl <http://www.heritas.nl/>  

 


  _____  


From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of John M Slatin
Sent: vrijdag 1 april 2005 6:17
To: Mike Barta; Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org; w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org
Subject: RE: Impact of not setting baseline and writing SC as functional
outcomes

Mike, I know it would be nice to get rid of the "so as" clause. But Gregg
made the point that this is one case where the rationale isn't necessarily
self-explanatory so that it might be worth keeping, and I think Becky's
proposed rewrite is good because it provides some explanation without
limiting it to a particular disability.

 

John

 

 

"Good design is accessible design."

Dr. John M. Slatin, Director 
Accessibility Institute
University of Texas at Austin 
FAC 248C 
1 University Station G9600 
Austin, TX 78712 
ph 512-495-4288, fax 512-495-4524 
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu 
Web  <http://www.ital.utexas.edu/> http://www.utexas.edu
<http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility> /research/accessibility 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Barta [mailto:mikba@microsoft.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 7:14 PM
To: Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com; John M Slatin
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org; w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org
Subject: RE: Impact of not setting baseline and writing SC as functional
outcomes

Or <proposed>"A mechanism is available to turn off background audio that
plays automatically.</proposed> 

 

η ελευθερία της ομιλίας είναι ουσιαστική στη δημοκρατία


  _____  


From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 11:39 AM
To: john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org; w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org
Subject: Re: Impact of not setting baseline and writing SC as functional
outcomes

 


great work going through all of the success criteria and submitting several
proposals to address the issue!  I have a modified proposal for GL 1.4 level
2 success criterion 3. 

<excerpt from john's post> 
GL 1.4 level 2 success criterion 3: Users can disable background audio that
plays automatically on a page so that it does not interfere with text
reading software they may be using 
Impacted: yes 
<proposed>"A mechanism is available to turn off background audio that plays
automatically. So that the audio does not interfere with text-reading
software that may be in use.</proposed> 
</john> 

<becky's proposed>"A mechanism is available to turn off background audio
that plays automatically so that the audio does not interfere with assistive
technology that may be in use. 
</becky's proposed> 
I would not assume that background audio only interferes with text reading
software.  It also might distract those with reading disabilities -although
they may not be using any assistive technology. Another, more generic
wording might be <proposal 2>"A mechanism is available to turn off
background audio that plays automatically so that the audio does not
interfere with the user's interaction with the remaining content."
</proposal 2> 

-becky 
  

Becky Gibson
Web Accessibility Architect
                                                      
IBM Emerging Internet Technologies
5 Technology Park Drive
Westford, MA 01886
Voice: 978 399-6101; t/l 333-6101
Email:  <mailto:gibsonb@us.ibm.com> gibsonb@us.ibm.com
Received on Friday, 1 April 2005 19:04:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:39:36 UTC