Re: Meaning of audio track kind 'descriptions'

I had a different understanding.

We keep coming back to these cases where we can imagine both "alternative" and "additional" tracks as solutions to some problem.

I've argued at length before that it doesn't work to have a blanket mechanism whereby any track can be labeled as either "alternative" or "additional" - and indeed we have no such mechanism: it's implicit in the track kind - you need to understand the kind to know whether it is alternative or additional.

I actually thought that all our audio kinds were alternatives. I'm no expect, but I would guess that it's hard to create a descriptions track which can be freely mixed with the original audio.

If both kinds exists (alternative descriptions and additive descriptions), then we need two kind values. Given that it's an accessibility requirement it would be nice for it to be explicit, so I would expect to have two "descriptions" kinds e.g. descriptions-add and descriptions-alt.


On Jun 15, 2011, at 4:17 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:

> Hi Bob,
> has the details. IIRC,
> we were discussing just audio description as an addition to the main
> audio track.
> audio descriptions+dialogue would probably be marked as "alternative".
> Is that a problem?
> Cheers,
> Silvia.
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Bob Lund <> wrote:
>> I don't remember the decision - do audio tracks of kind description include audio description + dialogue or just audio description?
>> Thanks,
>> Bob Lund

Received on Thursday, 16 June 2011 03:08:12 UTC