- From: Philip TAYLOR <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 09:23:49 +0100
- To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- CC: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Lachlan Hunt wrote: > BTW, DVDs don't get sold with books describing the entire film for those > who can't watch it. They do, however, get produced with captions, > subtitles and sometimes audio descriptions. Why should video on the web > be any different? We not discussing video on the web : we are discussing video embedded in a web page, which is very different. If we were discussing video on the web, as professional video producers, then I have no doubt that good accessibility practice would guide our adoption of audio description, closed captions and whatever. But we are not : rather, we are discussing taking video that (almost certainly) someone else has produced, and embedding it in a web page for which we are responsible. At that point, the accessibility issues become /our/ concern, and it is incumbent on us to ensure that such web pages are maximally accessible, (a) because it will help to ensure equal access for all, and (b) because it is a legal requirement in much of the world. Therefore I support those who advocate ensuring that a textual (or aural, or braille, or whatever) description of a /summary/ of the video content be required as an child-element or attribute of whatever element is used to embed the video. Philip Taylor
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2007 08:25:27 UTC