- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:45:23 -0500
- To: <koda@pk9.so-net.ne.jp>
- Cc: <public-comments-wcag20@w3.org>
Hi Tomoaki Can you clarify your proposed change? It is not clear what you are suggesting when you say: I hope that audio description is prescribed from Level2 and aimed at LevelAA as a following aim. We are not sure what you mean by "prescribed from level 2" and "aimed at level AA". - currently audio description is one way of meeting 1.2.2 (level 1) - it is required on level 2 in 1.2.3 - it is therefore not required for conformance at Level A (though a text description of multimedia would be if it were not provided) - it is required for conformance at Level AA Are you supporting this? Or are you suggesting a change? What change are you suggesting? Thank you very much. Sincerely, Gregg Co-chair > -----Original Message----- > From: public-comments-wcag20-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-comments-wcag20-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of > WCAG 2.0 Comment Form > Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 10:15 AM > To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > Subject: WCAG 2.0 Comment Submission > > > > Name: Tomoaki Kodaka > Email: koda@pk9.so-net.ne.jp > Affiliation: NTT CLARUTY CORPORATION > Document: W2 > Item Number: media-equiv > Part of Item: > Comment Type: general comment > Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change): >  The degree of the spread of audio description is different > country to country. > > I doubt that our situation in audio description is Level1 > slightly, because the word “audio description†itself is > not penetrated in my country. In Japan some volunteer groups > add audio description to movies. > > But it is not spread at the movie theater. It is desirable > that all Web image content has audio description. But we > don’t know what audio description is and how to produce > it-this is our present situation. So I feel fear that image > content is left out of the Web units intentionally, by we are > detected Level1.It is sure that people who lost the sense of > sight can’t get any information which is appeared by only > animations. Images lacking in text alternatives don’t have > information at all, while multimedia lacking in audio > description has much information―lines, sounds and so on. > When we hear the sound of train, we can guess the place is a > station. We can understand people are angry or laughing by > their tone. > > It is fact that many blind men enjoy listening TV. Lacking in > audio description is not a situation in which there is no > information. But producing audio description takes time and > money. Level1 is an obstacle for us. So I feel fear that image > content is left out of the Scoping of conformance claims. > > > > Proposed Change: > I hope that audio description is prescribed from Level2 and > aimed at LevelAA as a following aim. > > It will surely improve accessibility of image contents. I think.  > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 21 June 2006 15:45:49 UTC