From: David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca] Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2017 7:15 AM I agree the definition of images of text is ambiguous enough that it could be interpreted to apply to dynamic media. [Jason] The definition could apply to dynamic media, but only if the reason for using the image of text is “in order to achieve a particular visual effect”. Nothing in the definition restricts it to static images. So, for example, I suppose there could be an animated SVG in which the text characters are drawn rather than specified in Unicode for specific visual effect reasons, and that it might fail to meet contrast requirements. If someone uses open captions rather than timed text in a video in order to achieve a visual effect of some kind, then the definition might apply to them too. I think we have to delve into rather obscure, contrived cases before we find instances in which this definition applies to dynamic media. ________________________________ This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited. Thank you for your compliance. ________________________________
Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2017 14:27:43 UTC