W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > June 2007

Why is Sign Language not required on non-multimedia

From: WCAG 2.0 Comment Form <nobody@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:13:43 +0000 (GMT)
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Message-Id: <20070628161343.4EF8B47BA3@mojo.w3.org>

Name: Juan Ulloa
Email: julloa@bcc.ctc.edu
Affiliation: none, just a webmaster
Document: W2
Item Number: Success Criterion 1.2.5
Part of Item: 
Comment Type: general comment
Summary of Issue: Why is Sign Language not required on non-multimedia
Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
If 1.2.5 requires Multimedia to have Sign Language Interpretation, shouldn\'t there be a requirement for video as well?   Actually, shouldn\'t this requirement be for Audio/Video in general? My assumption is that you only need to provide sign language interpretation for Audio/Video in a multimedia presentation, right?  If that is the case, this should be moved out of guideline 1.2. But since Sign Language is not text, this wouldn\'t fin int guideline 1.1 and since this is not multimeda, it woudln\'t fit in 1.2.  I would maybe place it under 1.3 because we are essentially asking the user to have information provided in diffrent ways.  In this case, we are asking for voice audio to be provided in sign language.  

On a separate note, why would we require a website to provide sign language if they are already providing captioning?  Wouldn\'t synchronized captioning along with synchronized descriptions for video and multimedia and transcripts for audio-only methods of distributing content be enough to make the content fully accessible?   

Proposed Change:
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2007 16:13:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:14:44 UTC