Re: Should we talk about an icon for transcripts in WCAG 2.1?

+2

WCAG says what  — not how. 

gregg

> On Sep 7, 2016, at 1:41 PM, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com> wrote:
> 
> I agree with John’s comments, and will add that even within the US the CC icon isn’t standardized.  There is also the icon used by the National Captioning Institute (a combination of a TV screen and a speech call-out box).  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_captioning#Logo <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_captioning#Logo> 
> 
> I believe that this is too prescriptive for WCAG.  Just as we don’t say “you must use aria attributes” to meet a success criteria, we shouldn’t be saying “here is the icon to indicate a transcript”. Just my two cents…
> 
> Thanks,
> AWK
> 
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Standards and Accessibility
> Adobe 
> 
> akirkpat@adobe.com
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
> 
> From: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com <mailto:john.foliot@deque.com>>
> Date: Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 13:23
> To: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca <mailto:david100@sympatico.ca>>
> Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
> Subject: Re: Should we talk about an icon for transcripts in WCAG 2.1?
> Resent-From: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
> Resent-Date: Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 13:24
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I think that the topic of icons is almost separate from the question being posed (regarding transcripts). 
> 
> Iconography relies on shared understandings, and while promoting a new icon for transcripts is, on the surface, a great idea, I'm not sure if WCAG 2.1 (or Silver) is actually the place to be doing it. David's link to Google examples show a wide variety of "transcript icons" already in use in the wild today, and I'd be loathe to have W3C/WCAG define which of those examples is the "correct" icon. From a cognitive perspective, I'd also be leary of only accepting a graphic/icon as a means of conveying information, and so any icon would likely also need some appropriate labelling (both visible and nonvisible) to meet existing WCAG requirements.
> 
> Equally, absent from the current WCAG, is any requirement around color contrast and icons (a huge gap I've disliked for years), and so while I would agree that some requirements for iconography be included in WCAG 2.1, I'm not sure a specific icon for a specific use-case is the right direction forward at this time.
> 
> The current "CC in a TV" symbol was created at WGBH Boston when they pioneered Closed Captioning in the early 1970's, however that symbol is not used universally around the planet: for example, according to this wikipedia page, in locales like New Zealand, broadcasters use the "Slashed ear" symbol, which is the International Symbol for Deafness. (reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_captioning <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_captioning>) 
> 
> *IF* however this Working Group, or another TF or WG inside of the W3C, was to take on the creation of new "web accessibility icons" (and I would suspect it would be a set, rather than just a single icon) we'd likely also need to liaise with the ISO, as they seem to have this space "controlled" (as it were) with regard to Standards:
> 
> Relevant International Standards 
> The ISO 3864 series of standards which specify design requirements, including shapes and colours, for safety signs 
> The ISO/IEC 80416 series of standards which specify basic principles for graphical symbols for use on equipment 
> ISO 7000, Graphical symbols for use on equipment – Registered symbols 
> ISO 7001, Graphical symbols – Public information symbols 
> ISO 7010, Graphical symbols – Safety colours and safety signs – Registered safety signs 
> ISO 17724, Graphical symbols – Vocabulary 
> ISO 20712-1, Water safety signs and beach safety flags – Part 1 : Specifications for water safety signs used in workplaces and public areas 
> ISO 20712-2,Water safety signs and beach safety flags – Part 2 : Specifications for beach safety flags – Colour, shape, meaning and performance 
> ISO 20712-3, Water safety signs and beach safety flags – Part 3 : Guidance for use 
> ISO 22727, Graphical symbols – Creation and design of public information symbols – Requirements 
> ISO/IEC Guide 74, Graphical symbols – Technical guidelines for the consideration of consumers’ needs
> 
> JF
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:52 AM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca <mailto:david100@sympatico.ca>> wrote:
>> I find a lot of designers of commercial sites don't like to have their interface littered with links that say "transcript".
>> 
>>  I notice a few icons online.
>> http://tinyurl.com/z6br724 <http://tinyurl.com/z6br724>
>> 
>> Should we mention this in 2.1, that icons are ok, or should we try to push some momentum behind the icon idea... Perhaps that will result in an emerging definitive and recognizable icon (or letter combination). Like the CC for closed captions.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> David MacDonald
>>  
>> CanAdapt Solutions Inc.
>> Tel:  613.235.4902 <tel:613.235.4902>
>> LinkedIn 
>>  <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>> twitter.com/davidmacd <http://twitter.com/davidmacd>
>> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>
>> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>
>>   
>>   Adapting the web to all users
>>             Including those with disabilities
>> 
>> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>
> 
> 
> -- 
> John Foliot
> Principal Accessibility Strategist
> Deque Systems Inc.
> john.foliot@deque.com <mailto:john.foliot@deque.com>
> 
> Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion