W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2007

RE: Audio background amendment

From: David MacDonald <befree@magma.ca>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 20:19:46 -0400
To: "'Sean Hayes'" <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>, "'Gregg Vanderheiden'" <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <E1Hk80B-0000dx-1v@aji.w3.org>
Thanks Sean. 

 

My proposal does not mention the audio value zero. the two terms are:
"reduce its volume completely" and "turn off". I think that should be OK. I
think reasonable people will understand the intent section.

 

 

Individuals who use screen reading software can find it hard to understand
the speech output if there is other audio playing at the same time. This
difficulty is exacerbated when the screen reader's speech output is software
based (as most are today) and is controlled via the same volume control as
the sound. <add>Therefore, it is important that the user be able to turn off
this sound that competes with the screen reader sound.</add>

<add>Note: Having control of the volume includes being able to reduce its
volume completely. </add>

 

 

...access empowers people...

                   ...barriers disable them...

 

www.eramp.com

  _____  

From: Sean Hayes [mailto:Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com] 
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 6:13 PM
To: David MacDonald; 'Gregg Vanderheiden'; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: Audio background amendment

 

Just wanted to point out  that, at least according to CSS, a volume setting
of 0 is not the same as silent:

 

Volume refers to the median volume of the waveform. In other words, a highly
inflected voice at a volume of 50 might peak well above that. The overall
values are likely to be human adjustable for comfort, for example with a
physical volume control (which would increase both the 0 and 100 values
proportionately); what this property does is adjust the dynamic range. 

Values have the following meanings:

 <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/syndata.html#value-def-number> <number> 

Any number between '0' and '100'. '0' represents the minimum audible volume
level and 100 corresponds to the maximum comfortable level. 

 <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/syndata.html#value-def-percentage>
<percentage> 

Percentage values are calculated relative to the inherited value, and are
then clipped to the range '0' to '100'. 

silent 

No sound at all. The value '0' does not mean the same as 'silent'.

 

 

Sean Hayes
Standards and Policy Team
Corporate Accessibility Group
Microsoft
Phone: 
  mob +44 7977 455002
  office +44 117 9719730

 

From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of David MacDonald
Sent: 04 May 2007 15:53
To: 'Gregg Vanderheiden'; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: Audio background amendment

 

Oops missed a word

 

The current intent is:

 

Individuals who use screen reading software can find it hard to understand
the speech output if there is other audio playing at the same time. This
difficulty is exacerbated when the screen reader's speech output is software
based (as most are today) and is controlled via the same volume control as
the sound. <add>Therefore, it is important that the user be able to turn off
the background sound.</add>

<add>Note: Having control of the volume includes being able to reduce its
volume completely. </add>

 

access empowers people...

        ...barriers disable them...

 

www.eramp.com

From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu] 
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 12:36 AM
To: 'David MacDonald'; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: Audio background amendment

 

Hmmm

 

Do we need to include 

 

" control the audio volume (including 0) which is ... "          ?   

 

Kind of awkward but.  

 

I think maybe we don't need to because I've never seen anything that claimed
to have volume control that you can't set to zero.  I'm sure there is one
but I THINK we could just put this in HTM. 

 

Other people's thoughts?  

 


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

 

 


  _____  


From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of David MacDonald
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 5:46 PM
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Audio background amendment

A follow up to one of my comments on the Survey that was tabled.
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SimplifiedIntroAndConformance/results#xi
ntroedi

 

I think the language of 1.4.2 needs an adjustment. Or it needs to be fixed
in the intent.

 

<current SC 1.4.2>or a mechanism is available to control audio volume which
...</current SC 1.4.2>

An example. Some authors might say the user has "control" if they can only
adjust the volume a bit... which would defeat the purpose of the SC and let
them have distracting background. Let's add to the Intent... "Control means
that the volume can be reduced to zero DB"

David MacDonald

...access empowers people...

                   ...barriers disable them...

 

www.eramp.com

 
Received on Saturday, 5 May 2007 00:20:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:50 GMT