- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 03:29:10 +0000
- To: public-html-a11y@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10642
Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com
--- Comment #26 from Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> 2010-10-01 03:29:08 UTC ---
I guess one can imagine a mixed viewing situation where sighted users and blind
users discuss a web page with several videos on it and they discuss the poster
frames they see. A blind or vision-impaired user will not be able to
participate in such a discussion unless they get a description of what is
visible on the images. E.g. "go click on the video with the singing girl". This
also applies to the first frame displayed if no explicit poster frame is
provided. Since it's either this first frame or the explicitly linked image,
covering them both the same way makes sense.
Further, when a site decides to not make use of the provided poster image
functionality but overlays an image on the video element because they want
explicit control on clicks or something, there will also be a need for a alt
attribute.
So, maybe a @posteralt on video would make sense?
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Friday, 1 October 2010 03:29:12 UTC