- From: Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>
- Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 14:58:04 -0400
- To: <love26@gorge.net>, "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org>
- Cc: "WAI WCAG List" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
"Instead I think that for practical reasons we should change this from a priority 1 to a priority 2." I knew I was going to catch flack for this proposal but thought it needed to be said. If we leave it as a priority 1 then we're in the position of letting the user decide if the video content requires a synchronized audio description. So when is an audio description required? a) The a/v presentation itself is important to the user's well being. b) The a/v presentation itself is important to the culture. c) The audio track does not adequately describe the video. d) Other suggestions?? Can anyone suggest a site that has an synched audio description for an a/v presentation? Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Loughborough" <love26@gorge.net> To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org> Cc: "Chris Ridpath" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>; "Wendy A Chisholm" <wendy@w3.org>; "WAI WCAG List" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>; <geoff_freed@wgbh.org> Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 12:13 PM Subject: Re: Clarification Of Technique 1.3 > CMcCN: "Hmmm. I am absolutely opposed to this reasoning" > > WL: I second the notion. Just because there's a huge body of > inaccessible material is no excuse for condoning it. > > -- > Love. > ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE > http://dicomp.pair.com >
Received on Monday, 14 August 2000 14:58:32 UTC