Re: Change Proposal for Issue 194

I agree with Charles on all points.

One small point:  regarding interactive transcripts, I wouldn't classify them as either common or well-understood.  They aren't used *that* widely, nor are they particularly well-liked  (anecdotally speaking) in the caption-viewing community.  The motion that is often inherent in an interactive transcript-- either a moving box/highlighting region or scrolling text-- can be distracting and difficult to read when trying to watch a video.

Geoff/NCAM



On May 22, 2012, at 5:58 AM, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:

> On Tue, 22 May 2012 09:16:50 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> In an effort to work towards a consensus Change Proposal on Issue 194,
>> we've had several media subgroup meetings, the result of which is the
>> following Change Proposal:
>> 
>>  http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ISSUE-194/TranscriptElement
> 
> First up: This meets the "I can live with it" test for me.
> 
> But... a couple of comments:
> 
> In positive effects it claims to be better than longdesc - apparently because it can point to something in the page. Since longdesc can do that too, I don't see how that claim is justifiable - and anyway I don't think it is important to this case. It should simply be removed.
> 
> In talking to TV content producers who currently ship massive amounts of captioned content, they pretty clearly wanted the transcript to be inside the video element by default. What happens if the transcript element is placed inside the video element? Does it still need the transcript attribute? Or does it *have* to be placed outside the element?
> 
> IMHO (informed by people who would have to do this a lot) separating the two pieces and then having to put them together is something of an anti-pattern for authoring and maintenance, although for the sake of handling links to transcripts without duplication I think it is an acceptable compromise in this situation.
> 
> In the guidance about using the element to wrap links, it needs to be clear what happens if these are added for backwards compatibility and then hidden for design aesthetics. Experience suggests that people do that with anything they *think* is just for accessibility, and that they do it in ways that range from not very good to completely broken.
> 
> There is a URL API being developed in the Web Apps group - messy editor's draft at http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/url/raw-file/tip/Overview.html but given this is relatively simple it should be finished before HTML 5. That might be better than rolling your own.
> 
> Thanks for doing the work on pulling together, and thanks to everyone who worked to get a reasonable agreement.
> 
> cheers
> 
> Chaals
> 
> -- 
> Charles 'chaals' McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
>    je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg kan noen norsk
> http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
>

Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2012 11:02:50 UTC