RE: WCAG 2.0 Comment Submission - clarification

Hmmm
Good question 

Ah

This is handled with the definition.

audio description

    narration added to the soundtrack to describe important visual details
that cannot be understood from the main soundtrack alone

if there aren't any - they you are done. 

Hmmm how to say this in Understanding WCAG 2.0 without inviting people to
say 'none needed'.   

Thoughts? 


Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
The Player for my DSS sound file is at http://tinyurl.com/dho6b 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-wcag-teama-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-wcag-teama-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Bailey, Bruce
> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 11:19 AM
> To: public-wcag-teama@w3.org
> Subject: RE: WCAG 2.0 Comment Submission - clarification
> 
> I too am a little confused by the phrasing, especially since 
> I understand the word "images" to mean "multimedia" -- but I 
> this raises a bigger question in my mind:
> 
> Is formal Audio Description required if the content provider 
> asserts that the default audio track is sufficient to convey 
> all information?
> 
> (This comes up in our 508 testing requirements for multimedia 
>  Most content we get for evaluation is of the "talking head" 
> variety.  The need for a second audio track with the AD is rare.)
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-wcag-teama-request@w3.org 
> > [mailto:public-wcag-teama-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Gregg 
> > Vanderheiden
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 11:45 AM
> > To: koda@pk9.so-net.ne.jp
> > Cc: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: WCAG 2.0 Comment Submission - clarification
> > 
> > Hi Tomoaki
> > 
> > Can you clarify your proposed change?
> > 
> > It is not clear what you are suggesting when you say:
> > 
> > I hope that audio description is prescribed from Level 2 and 
> > aimed at Level AA as a following aim.   
> > 
> > We are not sure what you mean by "prescribed from level 2"   
> > and "aimed at level AA".  
> > 
> > - currently audio description is one way of meeting 1.2.2 (level 1)
> > - it is required on level 2 in 1.2.3   
> > - it is therefore not required for conformance at Level A (though a 
> > text description of multimedia would be if it were not provided)
> > - it is required for conformance at Level AA
> > 
> > Are you supporting this?  Or are you suggesting a change?  
> > What change are you suggesting? 
> > 
> > Thank you very much.
> > 
> > Sincerely,
> > 
> > Gregg
> > 
> > Co-chair
> >  
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: public-comments-wcag20-request@w3.org
> > > [mailto:public-comments-wcag20-request@w3.org] On Behalf 
> Of WCAG 2.0 
> > > Comment Form
> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 10:15 AM
> > > To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
> > > Subject: WCAG 2.0 Comment Submission
> > > 
> > > Name: Tomoaki Kodaka
> > > Email: koda@pk9.so-net.ne.jp
> > > Affiliation: NTT CLARUTY CORPORATION
> > > Document: W2
> > > Item Number: media-equiv
> > > Part of Item: 
> > > Comment Type: general comment
> > > Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
> > > "The degree of the spread of audio description is 
> different country 
> > > to country.
> > > 
> > > I doubt that our situation in audio description is Level 
> 1 slightly, 
> > > because the word "audio description" itself is not 
> penetrated in my 
> > > country. In Japan some volunteer groups add audio description to 
> > > movies.
> > > 
> > > But it is not spread at the movie theater. It is 
> desirable that all 
> > > Web image content has audio description. But we don't know what 
> > > audio description is and how to produce it-this is our present 
> > > situation. So I feel fear that image content is left out 
> of the Web 
> > > units intentionally, by we are detected Level 1. It is sure that 
> > > people who lost the sense of sight can't get any 
> information which 
> > > is appeared by only animations. Images lacking in text 
> alternatives 
> > > don't have information at all, while multimedia lacking in audio 
> > > description has much information.lines, sounds and so on.
> > > When we hear the sound of train, we can guess the place is a 
> > > station. We can understand people are angry or laughing by their 
> > > tone.
> > > 
> > > It is fact that many blind men enjoy listening TV. 
> Lacking in audio 
> > > description is not a situation in which there is no 
> information. But 
> > > producing audio description takes time and money. Level 1 is an 
> > > obstacle for us. So I feel fear that image content is left out of 
> > > the Scoping of conformance claims.
> > > 
> > > Proposed Change:
> > > I hope that audio description is prescribed from Level 2 
> and aimed 
> > > at Level AA as a following aim.
> > > 
> > > It will surely improve accessibility of image contents. I think."
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 21 June 2006 17:13:11 UTC