Re: DRAFT analysis of fallback mechanisms for embedded content ACTION-66

Hi Martin, Michael,

Feedback just on the audio and video related things from me below inline.

I won't comment on Michael's reply because I want to hear other
people's opinions.


On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 4:51 AM, Martin Kliehm <martin.kliehm@namics.com> wrote:
>
> - <video> has repair fallback. It has a poster image without @alt
> (ISSUE-142)[6].  It can contain several <track> elements (see below). It
> contains control buttons (are they mapped to A11Y API?) and a context menu.
> More details discussed in ISSUE-9 (video accessibility) [7].

> - <audio> has repair fallback.  It can contain several <track> elements (see
> below).  It contains control buttons (mapped to A11Y API?) and a context
> menu.  It doesn't have @summary or @alt.

In fact, <video> also doesn't have @summary or @alt.

> - <source> has an implicit @label and @language for closed captions defined
> in the closed format.

Are you talking about the case where captions are provided inside the
media resource? Note that they are all exposed through a TimedTrack
object and the kind, label and language will be available then as IDL
attributes.

> - <track> has explicit @label and @language attributes.  @label is dynamic
> and can by changed by script.  @language can include sgn-X (sign language).

When you say "sign language", you are implying that <track> will also
be used for external video (and audio) alternative content. This is,
in fact, not the case at this moment, see
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9452 . The current
<track> specification only refers to alternative text tracks. We will
still have to come up with a solution to audio and video alternative
content.


Cheers,
Silvia.

Received on Wednesday, 1 December 2010 04:14:41 UTC