W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rqtf@w3.org > January 2022

Re: [EXTERNAL] WoT Middleware

From: Raja Kushalnagar <raja.kushalnagar@gallaudet.edu>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 21:45:41 -0500
Message-ID: <CALxxnr_QiqFXWarF-+pnyOuMu4x1zOmThHNu00tqv2CQZm517Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Cc: "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>, "public-rqtf@w3.org" <public-rqtf@w3.org>, Joshue O Connor <joconnor@w3.org>
I like the accessibility metadata notation/certification concept as well.

In addition to identifying accessibility problems in middleware, it would
also help identify accessibility problems in pass-through or, increasingly
automatic accessibility technologies.

For example, in broadcast television programming, closed captions sometimes
fail to pass-through local broadcasters' equipment. Another example is when
a service's auto-captions conflict with the content provider's
human-generated captions -- Zoom will not pass through captions if local
auto-captions are turned on and there is no way to identify this issue as
far as I know. Another scenario I can think of is of auto-accessibility
features -- cloud-agent AI accessibility services are usually superior to
user-agent AI accessibility services -- and it would be helpful to know
which agent is providing accessibility.

On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 9:43 AM Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote:

> I like the this suggestion for metadata. That could then become a
> machine testable WCAG3 conformance requirement.
> Best,
> Janina
> White, Jason J writes:
> > Perhaps this is another good reason to agree that accessibility-related
> metadata are important, as those in the digital publishing community have
> been arguing for years. Work has also been done in Digital Publishing to
> support transformation of the metadata to the formats used in publishers'
> catalogues (e.g., the shopping site from which you purchase the book).
> > Do we need similar arrangements for WoT and similar products?
> > Another relevant concept, emerging from security-related work, is the
> Software Bill of Materials. As I understand the concept, it identifies all
> of the components used in a piece of software. Perhaps we need metadata
> that identify the software related to a hardware product (both what is in
> firmware and what the user has to access to configure and run the device).
> > Finally, of course, effective anti-discrimination laws which ensure that
> the apps, documentation and Web sites associated with end-user devices meet
> accessibility criteria seem to me to be a necessity. This is obviously a
> policy issue, hence beyond the scope of our work, but I am concerned that,
> without it, progress will be slow and inconsistent.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
> > Sent: Thursday, 27 January 2022 8:44
> > To: public-rqtf@w3.org; Joshue O Connor <joconnor@w3.org>
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] WoT Middleware
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or
> confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom
> it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail
> in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or
> take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete
> it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
> >
> >
> > Thank you for your compliance.
> >
> > ________________________________
> --
> Janina Sajka
> (she/her/hers)
> https://linkedin.com/in/jsajka
> Linux Foundation Fellow
> Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup:       http://a11y.org
> The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
> Co-Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures     http://www.w3.org/wai/apa
Received on Friday, 28 January 2022 02:46:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 17 January 2023 20:26:49 UTC