- From: Larry Goldberg <larryg@verizonmedia.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 22:27:44 -0400
- To: Raja Kushalnagar <raja.kushalnagar@gallaudet.edu>
- Cc: "Joshue O'Connor" <joconnor@w3.org>, Frances Baum <francesbaum@outlook.com>, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, "internal-immersive-captions@w3.org" <internal-immersive-captions@w3.org>, RQTF <public-rqtf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAFj327z9HNWSZUEeuU8h8W1auPQVnKXEzCGDFoP6uDiE9TFbww@mail.gmail.com>
I'll add one basic (and obvious) fact: Most captions are transmitted in the form of data which represent the characters and which include metadata that gives instructions to local hardware as to how to render the data as displayed text. As the characters themselves are rendered locally, bandwidth issues are not relevant to resolution of the text itself. For TV and streaming, the actual fonts, characters, resolution etc. are entirely dependent on the local character generator built into the hardware, unless the text itself is sent as bitmapped video. - Larry <http://www.verizonmedia.com/> Larry Goldberg Senior Director and Head of Accessibility Verizon Media 978 844 0744 31 St. James Avenue, 11th floor Boston, MA 02110 On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 9:47 AM Raja Kushalnagar < raja.kushalnagar@gallaudet.edu> wrote: > Caption and text legibility have similar characteristics, probably > including resolution. The main difference is time synchronization and > presentation, which impacts characteristics such as time-to-decode per > line. > > I did a quick search for text legibility and most articles state that use > cases for fonts are similar in 2D and VR, i.e., they assume legibility is > similar. > > In the 1990s, HCI researchers noted that text legibility was less on > low-resolution screens (which were common in that era). But since VR > resolution doesn't yet match 2D resolution, I think that research that > found reduced legibility for low resolution displays will be true for > today's VR caption/text legibility. > > On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 8:56 AM Joshue O'Connor <joconnor@w3.org> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> [+ Research Questions TF list on cc] >> >> Thanks Frances for starting this, and Christopher (happy to hear more >> from George). I was actually just preparing a mail for Christopher on >> this. So for some background. >> I've reviewed a spec called 'WebXR Layers API Level 1'. [1] I think >> there is an accessibility related concern. [2] >> >> To capture that here: >> >> The spec provides support for various layer types used in a WebXR >> session (adds 'composition' layers). It covers rendering, view creation, >> Video Layer creation, events and WebXR Device API stuff. >> >> It's mostly technical implementation details - but one thing that jumped >> out at me is that WebXR Layers API allows the rendering/re-rendering of >> certain content at different >> resolutions. So I was thinking this may have accessibility implications >> to ensure that important >> accessibility related content doesn't get scaled down. >> >> So the question is should we feedback to the immersive web group? Do we >> need to flag this to them or suggest a note is needed to >> say that captions or other accessibility content should be privileged >> and therefore not rendered poorly in certain contexts, such as when >> there are bottlenecks when rendering, or limited bandwidth? >> >> What would also be useful to us in Research Questions would be evidence >> that captions actually need to be high resolution, or if there known >> issues with low resolution captions in certain contexts in immersive >> environments. >> >> Or indeed any other info you deem useful! Appreciated, and if you have >> any questions please let me know. >> >> Thanks >> >> Josh >> >> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/webxrlayers-1/ >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.w3.org_TR_webxrlayers-2D1_&d=DwMFaQ&c=sWW_bEwW_mLyN3Kx2v57Q8e-CRbmiT9yOhqES_g_wVY&r=QarbWtjEl-bvVIvboyJcMpxDztO-OcLGT2j7LWGmmUY&m=bLVGqD-NS9lr4sewFAyo0WyF-hHjjxU5d5BJMsJKYYg&s=snBQRXQYIguf0d0Y0tXMVDa8sI282yDlBy3NYfUAZp8&e=> >> [2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-apa/2021May/0040.html >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.w3.org_Archives_Public_public-2Dapa_2021May_0040.html&d=DwMFaQ&c=sWW_bEwW_mLyN3Kx2v57Q8e-CRbmiT9yOhqES_g_wVY&r=QarbWtjEl-bvVIvboyJcMpxDztO-OcLGT2j7LWGmmUY&m=bLVGqD-NS9lr4sewFAyo0WyF-hHjjxU5d5BJMsJKYYg&s=COGTIUZQKqmfOZEsg7UydXLLjJ_tFkGNFfk1j0wb8go&e=> >> -- >> Emerging Web Technology Specialist/Accessibility (WAI/W3C) >> >>
Received on Friday, 16 July 2021 02:50:14 UTC