- From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 21:24:32 +0000 (GMT)
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> I'm not sure what you have in mind, but plenty of people enjoy > listening to the radio, via the internet, and this must include the In most cases, providing the unedited audio is the cheap option for these stations, and it is producing the transcript that is expensive.++ For most businesses, producing audio of acceptable standard is expensive, because it normally requires that they hire an actor or professional radio presenter to do the recording, and possibly the services of a recording studio. These are capital expenditure items, so require business cases and high level approval. Using an amateur recording on an otherwise glossy web site would not be considered acceptable, even for a minority audience. In the commercial world, in the absence of legislation, if you spend more on one feature, you spend less on others. > visually impaired. > presumably some stations write their content for the deaf community. > Would you prefer your news read by a newscaster you know or a machine? In most cases, the ability to navigate the audio from an internet radio station would be considered commercially undesirable, for reasons that are a long way from the ideals of the internet. I think that is one of the reasons why streaming audio is so much preferred, even for audio on demand material. If you look at the documentation for Microsoft Media Server, you will discover what the product is really about is the delivery of commercial breaks, not the entertainment content. I was trying to watch a foreign TV station that had inband subtitles (their language), and I wondered if it was possible for them to tweak the video encoder to give priority to the subtitles, but that sort of thing is just not what Media Server is about. Of course, even if the tools existed, their priorities might not allow for paying someone to hint the encoding. > Our students undoubtedly prefer recorded audio at the present time, as > do children. I suspect that is when they are using it for entertainment, not when seeking information. At least in the original web concept, such material is a leaf resource, and it is the pages used to get to it that require the real accessibility features. For a commercial developer, even continuous speech recording is expensive, but the short segments, needed to construct a navigations structure, are even more difficult to do well and not sound like an automated attendant at a call centre. For charities and public services, bandwidth tends to be the expensive item for speech. Incidentally, coming back to the real reasons for internet radio (the BBC is probably strange in this respect) it's generally reccommended that one use music recordings for the elderly with congnitive disabilities, because the commercial breaks, on live radio, confuse them; how well do your clients cope with commercials? ++ Transcripts of broadcasts are useful for language learners, as well as the deaf and those accessing from their office, where there are no sound cards and the firewall blocks the streaming audio.
Received on Tuesday, 18 February 2003 16:24:41 UTC