Re: Acessibility of <audio> and <video>

Justin James 2008-09-01 19.42:

> I can imagine the furor if we also applied this logic to
> images, by saying, "if you want accessible images, use a format
> that natively supports metadata of alternate text, or put a
> subtitle/caption/legend/etc. in your image." Heads would roll.
> On this other hand, I also agree that it is not HTML's
> responsibility to pre-determine every possible accessibility
> scenario for every possible type of content and account for it.

Add to that that movie formats are *very* often used for 
displaying photos. Plus the fact the <video> elment itself has a 
poster image to be displayed before the video is started.

> A middle ground that I would like to propose, would be for @alt
> to be allowed on any type of non-text element, as well as
> @longalt (or @longdesc), and a @longalturl attribute, which
> would allow for an URL to be given for a FULL textual
> representation. [...]


Hear hear! Well, actually, if we can avoid @alt and @longdesc, and 
instead allow textuall fallback <element>inside the element</>, 
then that would be better.

> Does this make sense? Would this meet the needs for providing
> accessibility metadata on non-img elements, while not getting
> in the way of providing multimedia content?

Is it because of the "not getting in the way" side that you 
propose e.g. @longdesc over some variant of <video>fallback</video>?
-- 
leif halvard silli

Received on Monday, 1 September 2008 20:23:51 UTC