W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > July 2011

Need (or not) for text equivalent of AV files

From: <noreply@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 04:23:20 +0000
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1QjknA-0004dh-3z@stu.w3.org>

Name: Maria Moore
Email: maria.moore@utas.edu.au
Affiliation: University of Tasmania
Document: W2
Item Number: Guideline 1.1: Provide text alternatives for any non-text content...
Part of Item: 
Comment Type: general comment
Summary of Issue: Need (or not) for text equivalent of AV files
Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
I am a bit unclear about the note on http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/media-equiv-av-only-alt.html, that says /Note: /A text equivalent is not required for audio that is provided as an equivalent for video with no audio information. For example, it is not required to caption video description that is provided as an alternative to a silent movie.
> Surely this does not assist deaf-blind people? I would have thought that a text equivalent would be needed.


Proposed Change:
Providing an audio description of video only creates another file (the audio description), that needs a text equivalent
Received on Thursday, 21 July 2011 04:23:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:14 UTC