W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > May 2014

RE: ISSUE-309 (Image profile fails WCAG 1.2): Image profile needs to permit text equivalent [TTML IMSC 1.0]

From: John Birch <John.Birch@screensystems.tv>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 09:41:46 +0000
To: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>, Michael Dolan <mdolan@newtbt.com>, 'Timed Text Working Group' <public-tt@w3.org>
Message-ID: <0981DC6F684DE44FBE8E2602C456E8AB014F72FDFE@SS-IP-EXMB-01.screensystems.tv>
Agreed… and my sincere apologies for diverting this thread.

However I do feel strongly about this issue and there is a point I feel compelled to make here.

Subtitle files always stand alone at some point in the life cycle between production and consumption, but I am unconvinced that this should be a strong differentiator or the (sole) justification for the inclusion of alternate text. (I don’t mean to imply that this is your view Nigel :-)

For me, the question is one of always trying to provide access… consider someone editing or qualifying the content… and for example consider if that person is blind (e.g. a blind employee involved in the QC of an image based subtitle file).
With alternate text that scenario is a possibility, and although clearly they may not necessarily be able to check the images, they would have the ability to check that the contents (if tagged with alternative text) appear to match any associated video.

This, for me, is the crux of accessibility provision… you always try and facilitate it, because it is difficult to envisage the impact it has and the necessity or desirability of it.

For me, the provision of an accessible equivalent (or description) of any visual content should not be an option or even a strong recommendation… it should be a mandate.

Best regards,
John

John Birch | Strategic Partnerships Manager | Screen
Main Line : +44 1473 831700 | Ext : 2208 | Direct Dial : +44 1473 834532
Mobile : +44 7919 558380 | Fax : +44 1473 830078
John.Birch@screensystems.tv<mailto:John.Birch@screensystems.tv> | www.screensystems.tv<http://www.screensystems.tv> | https://twitter.com/screensystems


Visit us at
Broadcast Asia, Marina Bay Sands, Singapore 17-20 June, Stand 5E4-01

P Before printing, think about the environment

From: Nigel Megitt [mailto:nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk]
Sent: 22 May 2014 10:24
To: Michael Dolan; 'Timed Text Working Group'
Subject: Re: ISSUE-309 (Image profile fails WCAG 1.2): Image profile needs to permit text equivalent [TTML IMSC 1.0]

Let's stick to the problem at hand – we're not working on CFF but on IMSC. If W3C is to make a recommendation that doesn't meet its own accessibility guidelines there has to be some explanation or context to describe how the impact on the user is mitigated. If there's work from CFF that you can bring in to back this up please do share it.

In terms of stand-along TTML documents, there's currently no hard requirement in IMSC that conformant documents are not standalone, so we have to cover the requirements when they are standalone.

However, Mike, you've clearly said you don't object to enabling text in the image profile. If there are no other objections then we can simply resolve to do that and close the issue with a decision to implement the change.

Nigel


On 21/05/2014 20:01, "Michael Dolan" <mdolan@newtbt.com<mailto:mdolan@newtbt.com>> wrote:

“Overlooked” and a “pity” in W3C perhaps, but not in CFF where it was studied and rejected as it created more problems than it solved.  Alternative full tracks/documents are a much cleaner solution in full media files (e.g. MP4).

Maybe W3C has different requirements for stand-alone TTML documents?

No objection to enabling it, but we could do with less judgment about other industry work.

                Mike

From: John Birch [mailto:John.Birch@screensystems.tv]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 2:02 AM
To: Timed Text Working Group
Cc: Glenn Adams
Subject: RE: ISSUE-309 (Image profile fails WCAG 1.2): Image profile needs to permit text equivalent [TTML IMSC 1.0]

This is actually a very old ‘requirement’… (it’s a great pity it is consistently over-looked ☹

http://www.w3.org/2005/03/21/DFXPLastCallResponses.html - specifically Al Gilman’s comments
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2003May/0011.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tt/2003May/0015.html


best regards,
John

John Birch | Strategic Partnerships Manager | Screen
Main Line : +44 1473 831700 | Ext : 2208 | Direct Dial : +44 1473 834532
Mobile : +44 7919 558380 | Fax : +44 1473 830078
John.Birch@screensystems.tv<mailto:John.Birch@screensystems.tv> | www.screensystems.tv<http://www.screensystems.tv> | https://twitter.com/screensystems


Visit us at
Broadcast Asia, Marina Bay Sands, Singapore 17-20 June, Stand 5E4-01

P Before printing, think about the environment

From: Glenn Adams [mailto:glenn@skynav.com]
Sent: 21 May 2014 09:41
To: Timed Text Working Group
Subject: Re: ISSUE-309 (Image profile fails WCAG 1.2): Image profile needs to permit text equivalent [TTML IMSC 1.0]

I had previously reported this same comment on the CFF-TT image profile.

On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Timed Text Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org<mailto:sysbot+tracker@w3.org>> wrote:
ISSUE-309 (Image profile fails WCAG 1.2): Image profile needs to permit text equivalent [TTML IMSC 1.0]

http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/TT/tracker/issues/309


Raised by: Nigel Megitt
On product: TTML IMSC 1.0

IMSC1 Image profile [1] defined in §6 does not permit a text equivalent. If this profile is used to provide captions as an alternative to audio then it will fail the WCAG2 guideline 1.2 [2]. From a practical perspective this would mean that users who can neither see nor hear well can not use tools to translate the content into e.g. Braille.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ttml-imsc1/#image-profile-constraints

[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/#media-equiv


Some potential ways to solve this:
1. Permit text to be included within the image profile that describes the images.
2. Require or recommend that when image profile captions are provided there should be a text profile caption track available simultaneously.






This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, copy, disclose or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. Screen Subtitling Systems Ltd. Registered in England No. 2596832. Registered Office: The Old Rectory, Claydon Church Lane, Claydon, Ipswich, Suffolk, IP6 0EQ
  ­­



----------------------------

http://www.bbc.co.uk

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to this.

---------------------
Received on Thursday, 22 May 2014 09:42:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 5 October 2017 18:24:15 UTC