RE: WCAG WG decision on SC that we sent for their approval from Bailey, Bruce on 2012-07-10 (public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org from July 2012)

From: Bailey, Bruce <Bailey@Access-Board.gov>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 12:13:55 +0000
To: Kiran Kaja <kkaja@adobe.com>
CC: "public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org" <public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C18AC41C570F214AAD320947DF8D16CE6DF4A92F@BLUPRD0810MB354.namprd08.prod.outlook.>

> The WCAG WG meeting minutes do not explain why they think the sentence about players is 
> inappropriate.  Do they consider that the SCs apply directly to players as well?

That was not it so much as, with the contemporary web world, separating out player from content is not always straightforward.  (And this happens with non-web content too.)

There was also the concern that the note seemed to be advise for regulatory bodies and thus was out of scope for the taskforce.  I cannot imagine the regulators <smile/> saying that present-but-unsupported captioning is sufficient.

Received on Tuesday, 10 July 2012 12:14:35 UTC