Comment LC-1077

Comment 53:

Source: http://www.w3.org/mid/001f01c695f9$31b504e0$9288b23a@tkhcomputer
(Issue ID: LC-1077)

Transcripts: Why isn't this at Level 1?  Shouldn't the equivalent
information be provided at Level 1?

Proposed Change:

Move to Level 1

----------------------------
Response from Working Group:
----------------------------

Success criteria 1.2.2, 1.2.3 and 1.2.7 build upon one another. At Level A,
SC 1.2.2 can be satisfied either by providing a full text alternative for
multimedia or by providing audio description of the video. At level A,
multimedia will either have a full text alternative or an audio description.

At Level AA, SC 1.2.3 requires an audio description. So multimedia that
satisfies level AA either has only an audio description, or both an audio
description and a full text alternative.

At Level AAA, SC 1.2.7 requires a full text alternative, so at level AAA
content will have both  an audio description and a full text alternative.

Success criterion 1.2.7 is not required at Level A because audio
descriptions are usually more effective than transcripts. This is due to the
fact that they contain much additional rich audio information from the
sounds track and because they allow individuals who are blind the option of
viewing the material with other people. Full text descriptions, however, are
an option for meeting this guideline at Level A.
----------------------------
Response from GSW:
----------------------------
Audio descriptions may be more effective than transcripts for people with
audio impairments but what about people who are blind? Are captions required
at Level A? What about people who can't operate the multimedia file? Or
whose assistive technology does not interact with the multimedia file?

Received on Friday, 6 July 2007 14:53:20 UTC