Re: Captions for audio clips

phil, good points.

just to clarify, could you state where you feel  P1, P2, P3 should be for
Audion/Video.

but i also think you can add in here text transcripts in html format.  Would
we want to say this is P1

So for Audio - Video
P1 is text transcripts
P2 is "What goes here?"
P3 is "Caption and Description"  with visual syncrohnization

For examples, pls see http://www1.usmint.gov/GoldenDollar/Sen_Dorgan.htm and
http://www1.usmint.gov/GoldenDollar/broadcast.cfm

regards, rob



----- Original Message -----
From: <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, December 10, 1999 4:05 PM
Subject: Re: Captions for audio clips


>
>
> I would argue that even priority 2 is too high.  If the listener has some
> residual hearing, then the visual synchronized captions are only aiding or
> making it easier to get the information.    The definition of Priority 3
is
> :
> "A Web content developer may address this checkpoint. Otherwise, one or
> more groups will find it somewhat difficult to access information in the
> document. Satisfying this checkpoint will improve access to Web documents.
> "
> I do not feel that adding visual captions to audio clips is removing
> "significant barriers" [see P2 definition].  I am also assuming that
volume
> control and play back controls on the user agent will provide the access
to
> the audio information that the user with residual hearing may need.
> Remember,  as the residual hearing approaches zero, the benefit of visual
> synchronized captions approaches zero, but never gets there because
> synchronized timed presentation of the text captions gives indication to
> rhythm or timing of the text - but, which is something that can be
> approached  - with good punctuation, hence requiring only a P3.
>
> Regards,
> Phill Jenkins
>
>

Received on Saturday, 11 December 1999 06:20:20 UTC