- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 23:38:37 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
- cc: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
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). Cheerrs 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 mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136 W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI 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