[Bug 13432] Editorial changes to The Video element (1 of 5)


--- Comment #12 from Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> 2011-09-27 23:53:09 UTC ---
> > But again I ask: if we're going to be politically correct, how do I determine
> > which of the many groups who need something here should be mentioned
> > explicitly, and which should be glossed over?
> The revised wording at the root of this bug was suggested by NCAM, who are
> widely regarded as both the pioneers of accessible media, as well as global
> leaders in that space. Their editorial advice is sound and appropriate [...]

I could live with either wording, but let's not make this a flame war and stick
to the technical issues at hand.

Ian asks for an editorial rule for authoring this an other aspects of the
specification in a manner that is appropriate to the community at hand.
Basically the question is: why did NCAM make this call in this instance.

Let me take a guess by example: if I am an elderly person who doesn't see or
hear that well any more, I do not want to be called "disabled" (as in: other
physical or cognitive disabilities), nor do I want to be called blind or deaf.
So, it probably makes sense to name the hard-of-hearing and visually impaired
communities explicitly.

>From a purely technical standpoint where their needs relate to video I can
personally not see a big difference between blind and visually impaired users,
nor between deaf and hard-of-hearing users. The only exception that comes to
mind would be that visually impaired users that are also deaf or
hard-of-hearing will want captions with a user ability to increase the font

Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Tuesday, 27 September 2011 23:53:15 UTC