- From: Philip TAYLOR <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
- Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 21:45:44 +0100
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- CC: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Anne van Kesteren wrote: > I don't really follow I'm afraid. The idea behind using <video> is to > show a video. If all browsers have video support (long term) there's no > need to fallback. At that point authors don't have to do much more than > <video src=geweldig></video> and make sure the geweldig resource is > accessible. This is passing the buck. Scenario : the Principal addresses the University and his address is recorded; his aide asks the webmaster to put the video up on the web. The webmaster looks at the video and finds there are no closed-captions, no subtitles, no accessibility features at all. What is he to do ? Refuse to put it up. That would be a brave webmaster indeed. No, instead he puts it up, then relies on the intelligent design of HTML 5 to allow him to add accessibility features to overcome the deficiencies of the raw material. And it is our responsibility to make sure that he can do this. Philip TAYLOR
Received on Monday, 25 August 2008 20:46:25 UTC