- From: Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk>
- Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 13:54:47 +0100
- To: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Accessible Platform Architectures Administration <public-apa-admin@w3.org>
+1 On 09/05/2018 20:38, Janina Sajka wrote: > Colleagues: > > This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to the Accessible Platform > Architectures (APA) Working Group on a new Charter for our WG. As you > know, our current Charter will expire at the end of July, and the first > step in the renewal process is for us to agree on the Charter proposal > we would offer to W3C. > > Having discussed a new Charter over the past several months, our > proposed new Charter draft can be found here: > > https://www.w3.org/2018/03/draft-apa-charter.html > > It is hereby proposed to forward this draft Charter as our proposal of > work for the coming 3-year Charter period. > > > * ACTION TO TAKE > > This CfC is now open for objection, comment, as well as statements of > support via email. Silence will be interpreted as support, though > messages of support are certainly welcome. > > If you object to this proposed action, or have comments concerning this > proposal, please respond by replying on list to this message no later > than 23:59 (Midnight) Boston Time, Tuesday 15 May. > > Janina > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Janina Sajka > > Linux Foundation Fellow > Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup: http://a11y.org > > The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) > Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures http://www.w3.org/wai/apa > > > > Here is my proposed feedback to the Timed Text Working Group: > > <draft-feedback> > > 1. While we appreciate that TTML Profiles for Internet Media Subtitles > and Captions 1.1 <https://www.w3.org/TR/ttml-imsc1.1/> is depending > on Timed Text Markup Language 2 (TTML2) > <https://www.w3.org/TR/ttml2/>, it should still include an > introduction that guides the reader to a better understanding of its > content. Such an introduction could respond to the following questions: > 1. Why are profiles needed for text-only and image-only > captions/subtitles? > 2. What are typical use cases for a image-only captions/subtitles? > 3. What is the purpose of a presentation processor, and a > transformation processor? > > 2. There is a general issue with the way that an author specifies > layout characteristics of captions and subtitles, such as font size, > font family, line height, background and positioning. The spec > describes the approach of the author specifying a “fixed layout” for > captions and subtitles that the user cannot change. However, it > must be possible for the user to overwrite the author’s choice of > font size, or background color, for example. This is necessary for > accessibility reasons, in the same way that browsers allow the user > to change font size and background color. How can we find a good > solution for these conflicting interests between author and user? > We would like to get into a discussion with you on this issue. > > 3. Section 2 Documentation Conventions (applies also to Timed Text > Markup Language 2 (TTML2) <https://www.w3.org/TR/ttml2/> section > 2.3). For accessibility of the spec, information such as whether an > element is deprecated or obsoleted should not be indicated by color > (or background color) alone (cf. WCAG 2.0 SC 1.4.1 > <https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/#visual-audio-contrast-without-color>). > > > 4. Section 5.1 General. The method of associating a text profile > document instance with an image profile document instance should be > specified for interoperability reasons, and not be left open to the > specific implementation. Also, the association should be in both > ways, i.e. also from the image profile document instance to the text > profile document instance. > > 5. Section 6 Supported Features and Extensions. All font-related > features are prohibited for the image profile. This seems to be an > unnecessary restriction if the image profile contains images in SVG > format which could be rendered differently based on the author’s > choice of font characteristics. > > 6. Section 7.7.3 itts:forcedDisplay. This seems like a temporary > solution. Wouldn’t it be better to define semantic layers of > information that each could be made visible and invisible at runtime > as appropriate for the user? For example, the user may want to see > either speech-only (subtitles), narration speech only (parts of > subtitles), foreign-language speech-only (parts of subtitles) or any > combination of them. > > 7. Section 7.7.4 itts:altText. While we see this feature as useful for > accessibility purposes, it should be mandatory for images rather > than recommended only. As mentioned in the spec, one could take the > pertaining text passage from the text profile document instance – > but (1) an accompanying text profile is not required, and (2) the > alternative text for the image could be different from the textual > caption. Therefore, the itts:altText element should always be > specified, but it should be empty for decorative images (not clear > if a “decorative image” used as a caption makes sense anyway). By > requiring an itts:altText for every image, but allowing for an empty > element in case of a decorative image, we would align it with the > alt attribute in HTML5 for images. > > </draft-feedback> > > Best regards, > > Gottfried > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Accessible Platform Architectures Working Group Issue Tracker > [mailto:sysbot+tracker@w3.org] > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 18. Oktober 2017 09:29 > An: public-apa@w3.org > Betreff: apa-ACTION-2152: Review ttml profiles for internet media > subtitles and captions 1.1 https://www.w3.org/tr/ttml-imsc1.1/ > > apa-ACTION-2152: Review ttml profiles for internet media subtitles and > captions 1.1 https://www.w3.org/tr/ttml-imsc1.1/ > > http://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/track/actions/2152 > > Assigned to: Gottfried Zimmermann > -- @LeonieWatson @tink@toot.cafe Carpe diem
Received on Thursday, 10 May 2018 12:55:25 UTC