- From: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 22:42:28 -0500
- To: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Cc: Accessible Platform Architectures Administration <public-apa-admin@w3.org>, Glenda Sims <glenda.sims@deque.com>, Preety Kumar <preety.kumar@deque.com>
- Message-ID: <CAKdCpxw1=RbUmxOCpFAJuW8+ojcC-jmaCgbpK3wmEx5U87=cnw@mail.gmail.com>
- 1. Deque supports the ongoing work of the APA WG, as well as moving the Personalization Task Force from the ARIA WG to the APA WG. Our concern is with the Rec Track Modules defined in the Charter deliverables. We have serious reservations regarding the emergent approach of an attribute-based taxonomy solution, which, despite assurances to the contrary, is what is being proposed and illustrated in the current 3 draft modules. This remains fundamentally the same approach that has been proposed since at least TPAC Sapporo (2015), where a number of accessibility people pushed back hard on the "ARIA all the things" approach then. Moving the same basic idea to first coga-* attributes, and then aui-* attributes is simply a reformulation of the original problem using any of these different attribute prefixes: author lift. "Leaving them in" the Editors Draft (so that we remember what we're talking about) is not the right answer, because it continues to leave the un-informed observer with the over-arching idea that we're working on new attributes. Nothing in the Charter or emergent modules suggests otherwise. Finally, as others have noted, where is the compare and contrast of approaches we should have before we continue to pursue a specific strategy? One of the advantages of moving this Task Force away from the ARIA WG was to free the TF to explore options beyond an attribute-based solution. JF On Tue, May 15, 2018, 5:05 PM Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote: > +1 > > Janina Sajka writes: > > 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 [1]TTML Profiles for Internet Media > > Subtitles and Captions 1.1 is depending on [2]Timed Text Markup > > Language 2 (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: > > > > a. Why are profiles needed for text-only and image-only > > captions/subtitles? > > b. What are typical use cases for a image-only captions/subtitles? > > c. 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 [3]Timed Text > > Markup Language 2 (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. [4]WCAG 2.0 SC 1.4.1). > > > > > > 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 [5]https://www.w3.org/tr/ttml-imsc1.1/ > > > > > > [6]http://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/track/actions/2152 > > > > > > Assigned to: Gottfried Zimmermann > > > > References > > > > 1. https://www.w3.org/TR/ttml-imsc1.1/ > > 2. https://www.w3.org/TR/ttml2/ > > 3. https://www.w3.org/TR/ttml2/ > > 4. > https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/#visual-audio-contrast-without-color > > 5. https://www.w3.org/tr/ttml-imsc1.1/ > > 6. http://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/track/actions/2152 > > > -- > > 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 > > >
Received on Wednesday, 16 May 2018 03:43:05 UTC