Some notes on checkpoints 1.1 and 1.2

More dribs and drabs.
 
John
 
Notes on WCAG 2.0 Working Draft posted 24 April 2002

John Slatin


Current wording for Checkpoint 1.1, example 2


Checkpoint 1.1

Example 2: Providing a short label and a longer explanation are provided for
a data chart.

A bar chart compares how many widgets were sold in June, July, and August.
The short label says, "Graph of the numbers of widgets sold in June, July,
and

August." The longer explanation provides the data presented in the chart.

[js: I don't think it's sufficient for a LONGDESC simply to present the data
in list form: the point of a bar chart, pie chart, etc., is precisely that
it provides a symbolic representation of the numerical data to assist
understanding, and I believe a LONGDESC should attempt to render that
information as well as the data themselves.]

 


Current wording for Checkpoint 1.2


Checkpoint 1.2

if a pure audio or pure video presentation requires a user to respond
interactively at specific times in the presentation, then a
time-synchronized equivalant

(audio, visual or text) presentation is provided.

 

[js: the word "pure" is confusing here.  Suggestion: "If a presentation
containing only video or only audio requires a user to respond interactively
at specific times in the presentation, then a time-synchronized equivalent
(audio, visual, or text) is provided."]

 

Under definitions:


Current wording under definitions for checkpoint 1.2:


audio descriptions are equivalents of visual information from actions, body
language, graphics, and scene changes that are voiced (either by a human or

a speech synthesizer) and synchronized with the multimedia presentation.

 

[js: Syntactically, the antecedent for "that" woulc be "changes," not
"equivalents of visual information...". 




Suggested wording for definition of audio description:


audio descriptions are equivalents of visual information from actions, body
language, graphics, and scene changes.  Audio descriptions are voiced
(either by a human or

a speech synthesizer) and synchronized with the multimedia presentation."]

 


Current wording for note on time-dependent presentations and tracking
multiple events with a single sense:


Note:Time-dependent presentations that require dual, simultaneous attention
with a single sense can present significant barriers to some users.

[js: "dual, simultaneous attention with a single sense" is confusing.  




Suggested wording for note on tracking multiple events with a single sense:


 "Time-dependent presentations requiring people to use a single sense to
follow two or more things at the same time may present significant barriers
to some users."]

 

In the same example:


Current wording for later part of same note:


.... Where possible, provide

content so that it does not require dual, simultaneous attention or so that
it gives the user the ability to effectively control/pause different media

signals.

[js: The following revision is proposed for consistency with the previous
suggestion and for greater clarity.


Suggested wording for continuation of note about tracking multiple events
with a single sense:


"... Where possible, provide content so that it does not require tracking
multiple simultaneous events with the same sense, or give the user the
ability to effectively control different media signals independently.]

 


Checkpoint 1.2, Example 3, Current wording:


Example 3: a silent animation.

An animation shows a clown slipping on a banana and falling down. There is
no audio track for this animation. No captions or audio description are
required.

Instead, provide a text equivalent as described in checkpoint 1.1.

[js: I agree that this is correct for this example, but wonder if it holds
for all silent animations, regardless of length or purpose for which they're
provided on the site?  For example, an educational site that includes silent
animations of cellular processes, etc.  Also, suppose the site presents a
video clip of, say, Charlie Chaplin in a silent film like The Gold Rush.  Is
audio description required? Is it appropriate?]

 

 
John Slatin, Ph.D.
Director, Institute for Technology & Learning
University of Texas at Austin
FAC 248C, Mail code G9600
Austin, TX 78712
ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu <mailto:jslatin@mail.utexas.edu> 
web http://www.ital.utexas.edu <http://www.ital.utexas.edu/>