Re: Back to Principle 1

So until we get Kynn's visualiser working properly, this is precisely the
case which 8.4 covers, and we should include the requirements for multimedia
to be packaged as part of the content in this first principle.

(I find myself thinking that it would be easier to deal with the old
nomenclature - I don't think we have established a case for changing it).


Charles McCN

On Mon, 17 Jul 2000, Jason White wrote:

  Principle 1 is supposed to catch the case to which Al referred, in which
  there are no higher-level semantic representations available from which
  presentations in different sensory modalities can be derived and
  "equivalents" are therefore needed. Perhaps we could reformulate the
  principle as follows:
  "Ensure that content can be rendered in any of the three sensory
  modalities (visual, auditory or tactile)."
  This is essentially what Gregg suggested at the meeting. The difficult
  aspect is that it applies not just to the whole of the content, but to
  parts of it (for instance, if the auditory component of a multimedia
  presentation is unavailable, one should provide captions instead of
  offering, as the only alternative, a transcript of the entire
  presentation, so that users can view the visual component while having
  synchronized access to the captions). However, these subtleties can be
  explained in the text and it may not, perhaps, be essential that they also
  be made clear in the words of the principle itself.

Charles McCathieNevile    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative            
Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053
Postal: GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne 3001,  Australia 

Received on Sunday, 16 July 2000 23:38:45 UTC