W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2006

RE: (techs) Test 145

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 11:00:41 -0600
To: "'Andrew Kirkpatrick'" <akirkpat@adobe.com>, "'Katie Haritos-Shea'" <ryladog@earthlink.net>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Cc: <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>
Message-ID: <00b401c70cc5$69a35170$8c17a8c0@NC84301>

If the audio file isn't synchronized with the video - it wouldn't be a
sufficient technique I wouldn't think.    Anyone see a reason why it would ?



Gregg
 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 10:04 AM
> To: Gregg Vanderheiden; Katie Haritos-Shea; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Cc: chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca
> Subject: RE: (techs) Test 145
> 
> 
> > There are no 'non-associated' audio descriptions that I know of.
> 
> Let's make sure that we're not saying the same thing here.  
> When I say non-associated audio description I mean that the 
> audio description in Katie's example appears to be offered as 
> a separate audio file, which I referred to as not being 
> associated with the primary media.  It is, of course, 
> asociated in that it is presumably describing that media content.
> 
> My objection is to having that be the only successful pass 
> example for this guideline.
> 
> AWK
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > They are synchronized with the video.  
> > 
> > We do have a total text version of AV as an option but the video 
> > descriptions are text, not audio, and are much more extensive.
> > 
> > 
> > Gregg
> >  -- ------------------------------
> > Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org
> > > [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Kirkpatrick
> > > Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 10:27 PM
> > > To: Katie Haritos-Shea; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> > > Cc: chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca
> > > Subject: RE: (techs) Test 145
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > Test 145 is in need of a passing example that incorporates a 
> > > > transcript or audio file:
> > > > 
> > > > I suggest one that has both:
> > > > 
> > > > 145-7.html  Will pass the test. (Link to multimedia file
> > > > (.mwv) with a text trancript and and audio file (mp3).)
> > > > 
> > > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 
> > > > Transitional//EN""http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd">
> > > > <html lang="en">
> > > > <head>
> > > > <title>OAC Testfile - Check #145 - Positive</title>
> > </head> <body>
> > > > <p>View <a href="movie.wmv"> the movie </a>. Read the <a 
> > > > href="movie.txt">Transcript of the Movie</a> or get the <a 
> > > > href="movie.mp3">Audio Description of the Movie</a>.
> > > > </p>
> > > > </body>
> > > > </html>
> > > 
> > > Does this count?  There is a transcript, but I don't think
> > that WCAG
> > > should be advocating for non-asociated audio descriptions.
> > > 
> > > The problem is that you can't really tell without viewing
> > the video or
> > > (in the case of SMIL) parsing a meta file.  Comments on 
> the existing
> > > techniques:
> > > 
> > > 145-1.html Will fail the test. (Link to multimedia file
> > > (.wav) without a text equivalent.)
> > > 
> > > <p>View <a href="movie.wmv">the movie</a>.</p>
> > > 
> > > In 145-1 the text says ".wav" but the movie is a .wmv.  I
> > assume that
> > > the .wmv is correct.  If so, I would say that this requires 
> > > verification since there could be open captions or open audio 
> > > descriptions (in wmv that the only kind of audio 
> descriptions there 
> > > is).  This is not an example of a "fail", just a "can't pass".
> > > 
> > > 145-3.html Will fail the test. (Link to multimedia file
> > > (.mpg) without a text equivalent.)
> > > 
> > > Ditto for this one - not "fail", just "can't pass".
> > > 
> > > 145-4.html Will fail the test. (Link to multimedia file
> > > (.mov) without a text equivalent.)
> > > 
> > > .mov can carry text and audio description information in the .mov 
> > > file.
> > > This example is also not an outright failure.
> > > 
> > > 145-5.html Will fail the test. (Link to multimedia file
> > > (.ram) without a text equivalent.)
> > > 
> > > Ram files are often used - they are just simple metadata 
> files for 
> > > realplayer that point to other files for the player to
> > load.  They are
> > > useful when playing a smil file since it ensures that the
> > smil will be
> > > loaded by the realplayer, as the open command is 
> delivered via the 
> > > .ram directly to the real player.  So, the .ram can point
> > to a .smil
> > > which may have captions/descriptions (or it could point 
> to an open 
> > > captioned/described file).  As a result, this is not a good
> > example of
> > > a failure.
> > > 
> > > 145-6.html Will fail the test. (Link to multimedia file
> > > (.aif) without a text equivalent.)
> > > 
> > > Sure, this fails.
> > > 
> > > I assume that the list of "multimedia" file extensions is
> > not final -
> > > "Multimedia file extensions are .wmv, .mpg, .mov, .ram, and
> > .aif.".  
> > > I'd add asf, swf, avi, rm, dv, flv, divx, 3gp, mp4, and
> > others.  I'd
> > > probably remove .ram since it is just a metafile (if not then you 
> > > should add wmx and asx since they are equivalent for 
> windows media).
> > > 
> > > AWK
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 20 November 2006 17:01:01 GMT

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