- From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 17:43:16 -0400
- To: public-apa-admin@w3.org
- Cc: Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, W3C WAI Accessible Platform Architectures <public-apa@w3.org>
Colleagues: Multiple messages in support of the draft revised charter for the APA-WG have been received in response to the below Call For Consensus (CfC).[1] One objection relating to one aspect of the Charter was received. [2] This objection received a response,[3] and additional discussion on a separate email thread.[4] Following on this discussion and following on the addition of disclaimers to draft normative specifications proposed to be migrated from the ARIA-WG to APA, this objection was withdrawn.[5] This draft is consequently agreed to as a consensus of APA and is now forwarded to W3C for additional processing and consideration. Janina Sajka APA Chair [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-apa-admin/2018May/0000.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-apa-admin/2018May/0008.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-apa-admin/2018May/0009.html [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-apa/2018May/0021.html [5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-apa-admin/2018May/0010.html Janina Sajka writes: > +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 > -- 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 Thursday, 17 May 2018 21:43:45 UTC