- From: Matt May <mattmay@adobe.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 15:55:10 -0700
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- CC: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- m On Aug 14, 2009, at 2:56 PM, "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: >> >> In essence you would be making full audio content available (not >> accessible) to more people by placing it on the public web. But >> without a transcript, full content would not be accessible to the >> deaf, hard of hearing, deaf-blind. They would be locked out. So, yes, >> it would be in conflict with WCAG. > > This seems to be contrary to what Matt said: No, not at all. >> Whether you meet WCAG or not, that's your option. But nowhere in >> there does >> it say, if you don't publish a transcript, then you _must not >> publish the >> audio_. You should not position WCAG (or accessibility advocates) >> as a force >> against publishing information relevant to the development of HTML5. > > though he then followed it by saying: > >> If you >> choose to make audio recordings available, and you intend to make >> that >> content accessible, but you feel it is an undue burden on >> yourselves to do >> so, contact Judy Brewer and ask that W3C transcribe the recordings. > > I'm not sure if the latter was intended to be taken as "you can do > this if you want", or "in order to follow WCAG you must". I order to follow WCAG, you must. Transcripts are the minimum requirement. > It surprises me a great deal if accessibility guidelines say that > publishing additional non-accessible content in addition to already > accessible content is a bad thing. They do not. That was my point. It appeared that WCAG was being set up as the reason recordings won't happen, and I want to stress that the two-choice dilemma is not publish a transcript or don't publish audio. It is publish a transcript, or fail to meet the basic WCAG requirement. Should you decide not to, you will be violating W3C process, but, let's be honest, few of the participants here worship at the altar of the W3C Process Document. In other words, feel free to go the inaccessible route, but expect to be called on it. - m
Received on Friday, 14 August 2009 22:55:59 UTC