RE: 1.2.5 is ambiguous

I had assumed that in 1.2.5 multimedia deliberately meant both.  But then I was moderately surprised that the captioning and Audio Description requirements had been broken into live and pre-recorded SC.  This worked out to be quite fortuitous as the discussion developed later on Level assignments for the associated SC.
 
Unless there is serious consideration of promoting 1.2.5 to Level 2 it is not clear to me that there is any reason to divide it into two SC (one for live, one for pre-recorded).
 
I disagree with the characterization that real world implementation of 1.2.5 is rare.  For the U.S. Federal government, there is already the requirement to provide sign language interpretation for live events (multimedia, per our definition, if the live events are broadcast) as essentially a Level 1 requirement for 504 (not 508).  The SC, as written, provides for the situation where human sign language interpreters are used at the point of delivery.  Like other agencies, we routinely make use of IPTV for broadcasts (over corporate intranet), typically from headquarters to the regions.  In addition to live (open) captions (as part of the broadcast) sign language interpreters are provided at headquarters and in the regions.  People have the captions available at their desk, but one has to go to a conference room to take advantage of the sign language interpretation.
 
Now, I don't think think the authors of the SC had our situation in mind when they wrote 1.2.5, but I am quite pleased that, taken at face value, it is directly applicable.  Somewhat ironically, sign language interpretation of live multimedia is easier for us to achieve than for pre-recorded multimedia.  (Exactly the opposite of the situation with captions and AD).
 
Anyway, my opinion is that we mean both, and that could be clarified, but don't change the wording of the SC.
 

-----Original Message-----
From: public-wcag-teama-request@w3.org [mailto:public-wcag-teama-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Li, Alex
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 10:48 AM
To: public-wcag-teama@w3.org
Subject: RE: 1.2.5 is ambiguous


Real world implementation of this sc would be extremely rare with or without specification on live or pre-recorded multimedia.  I really don't think it matters. 
 

  _____  

From: public-wcag-teama-request@w3.org [mailto:public-wcag-teama-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Gregg Vanderheiden
Sent: Friday, Jul 14, 2006 7:08 AM
To: public-wcag-teama@w3.org
Subject: 1.2.5 is ambiguous



1.2.5 reads 

1.2.5 Sign  <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/appendixA.html#sign-languageinterpdef> language interpretation is provided for multimedia <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/appendixA.html#multimediadef> . [ How  <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20060707/Overview.html#media-equiv-sign> to meet 1.2.5] 



For all other SC we say "pre-recorded" or "live"   

Do we mean both here?  

If so - where do we say that? 

Do we need to?

 

Can we just say in HTM that we didn't say pre recorded or live because in this case we intended both?  

Did we? 


Gregg