W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: Proposed response to the WAIC public comment

From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 22:31:42 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTikQ5zJrt9X5ibsAU8Ea-bUG_ve_zuuEpJ1ESqDC@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sailesh Panchang <spanchang02@yahoo.com>
Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
I believe the crux of the issue sent to us is that the video player
can be updated without notice. If that were not the case, this would
be a much simpler discussion.

On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 7:47 PM, Sailesh Panchang <spanchang02@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Loretta,
> By creating blog entries or responding to emails, a user is creating content without going through the author. But the email application itself is solely under the authorís control and this interface cannot be changed by a user. I do not dispute for a moment that such an email application or an audio-video player for that matter is a widget and is also Web content. But I do not think the following references the actual application interface or widget-type of Web content:
>> "Sometimes, Web pages are created that will later have additional
>> content added to them. For example, an email program, a blog, an
>> article that allows users to add comments, or applications supporting
> user-contributed content. ..."
> Actual audio-video content uploaded to be rendered via a YouTube player is content like an email entry or blog entry. The YouTube or video player application is content like the email application that is not user modifiable.
> That is the distinction I am trying to highlight though both constitute Web content.
> So it is not clear why the draft document says the following:
>> Your example describes the YouTube player as not under the author's
>> control; it may be updated without notice. The independent update of
>> the player does sound similar to the examples above, so it could be
>> considered third party content.
> About the Word/Excel viewer: I realized that was an inappropriate example soon after I sent that email.
> Thanks,
> Sailesh
Received on Tuesday, 26 October 2010 05:32:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:34:06 UTC