Re: Acessibility of <audio> and <video>

Dave Singer 2008-09-10 00.30:

> At 11:17  +0300 4/09/08, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> On Sep 4, 2008, at 01:13, Dave Singer wrote:


>> More to the point even, automatic mechanisms for language selection 
>> are known to be *practically pointless* to engineer, because we 
>> already know from HTTP Content-Negotiation that users don't bother to 
>> configure it.
> 
> We've had some success with QuickTime and alternate language, on occasion.

I wonder when it begins to be pointless?  Our cable TV set-top box 
was delivered at the door being preprogrammed to prefer subtitling 
in Norwegian. And that works. So it should be a success!

Likewise, browsers nowaways - probably with the exception of 
Firefox  - tend to pick their preferred language setting from the 
OS. Which works as well. So it should be a success? (Well, I have 
some complaints about how Safari forces me to change the language 
preference of my entire OS if I want to tell it to prefer a 
certain language - but OK.)

There is a problem when we go in to the finer granularty of things 
- is that why it should be pointless? Users often do not regulate 
the default language preference settings. And it also isn't 
particulary easy to select language preferences in a web browser. 
(Why is it not provided as a menu beside the Encoding selection 
preferences e.g.?) Plus that browsers are choke full of cookies 
that override the language prefernces anyhow. Etc.

So I would not measure the success in the number of times users 
change their language preferences.
-- 
leif halvard silli