RE: Captions and audio descriptions

Hmm interesting
The alternative would have to be synchronized or it doesn't fit under this
guideline.
   

How about  

<proposal>
At level 1:
1. For prerecorded multimedia, one of the following is provided:
* captions, or
* a collated text alternative that conveys the same information as both the
audio and video tracks of the multimedia.

2. For prerecorded multimedia, one of the following is provided:
* audio descriptions, or
* a collated text alternative that conveys the same information as both the
audio and video tracks of the multimedia.

At level 2:
1. Captions are provided for multimedia.

2. Audio descriptions of video are provided for prerecorded multimedia.
</proposal>


I think this may work for audio description - in that it would provide
roughly the same information.   However for Captions it would be much less
unless much more information about visual track than is usually provided in
audio descriptions was required. 


Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 


-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Loretta Guarino Reid
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 8:59 AM
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Captions and audio descriptions


Michael, Yvette, and I took an action item at the last teleconference to
propose "compromise" success criterion for captions and audio descriptions.

<proposal>

At level 1:
1. For prerecorded multimedia, one of the following is provided:
* captions, or
* text alternatives that convey the same information as the multimedia.

2. For prerecorded multimedia, one of the following is provided:
* audio descriptions, or
* text alternatives that convey the same information as the multimedia.

At level 2:
1. Captions are provided for multimedia.

2. Audio descriptions of video are provided for prerecorded multimedia.

</proposal>

Under this proposal, captions and audio descriptions are sufficient at
either level, but required at level 2. At level 1, a complete text
equivalent is a sufficient alternative to either captions or audio
descriptions. 

Note that the text equivalent may need to be different from a transcription
of captions or audio description, since the author cannot assume that the
user is viewing the multimedia at the same time.

This proposal combines the success criteria for prerecorded and live
captions into a single success criteria at level 2. For clarity in
describing techniques, we may wish to continue to keep them separate.

Loretta

Received on Tuesday, 8 November 2005 16:19:51 UTC