- From: John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
- Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 06:42:43 -0700
- To: "'Sean Hayes'" <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>, "'Silvia Pfeiffer'" <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, "'Sam Ruby'" <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: <public-html@w3.org>
Sean Hayes wrote > > I am not sure that these are necessarily the same thing at all. A > transcript is IMO a static untimed merged representation of the > information in in the caption and description tracks. A longdesc would > probably be something more along the lines of a synopsis or précis. I > think we need mechanisms that can handle both of these use cases. I could not agree more. A transcript of a 90 minute video would be approximately 90 minutes worth of reading, which is significantly more than what a 'longer textual description' would call for under any circumstances. It is not a description, it is a transcript. In checking with a number of non-sighted colleagues, there seems to be some consensus that this would be onerous on the end user, and insufficient/incorrect for the role. > > I agree that it makes sense to wait and see how the discussion on > generic 'off page text' pans out; it might be for example that we end > up with both an attribute and an element e.g. @longdesc and <longdesc> > (following the precedent of @src and <source>) where the latter admits > a richer set of adornments, possibly including some sort of role > attribute which can distinguish between a transcript and a synopsis, > amongst other uses for off-page text. This is the first I have heard of proposing a <longdesc> element (and as you know, I follow *those* discussions quite closely). It is an interesting if unorthodox idea. Do you have further thoughts jotted down somewhere? I would encourage you to surface them on this list soon. Cheers! JF
Received on Thursday, 15 March 2012 13:43:29 UTC