- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
- Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 21:01:30 +0200
- To: "Vicente Luque Centeno" <vlc@it.uc3m.es>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
On Sat, 28 May 2005 18:37:14 +0200, Vicente Luque Centeno <vlc@it.uc3m.es> wrote: > ... some evaluation tools > say that, as long as I have a link to a video or song, I MUST publish the > alternative. I don't agree with that. It is the same problem as if I make > a link to a non accessible web site. Hi Vicente, I would say thhe same as Tina - the page that links to the videos doesn't include them, so that page doesn't necessarily break checkpoint 1.1, but considering them as part of a website the site as a whole doesn't meet the requirements. Very little formal work was finished by the WCAG group on applying WCAG to a collection - they have a number of relevant checkpoints but there is not a lot of guidance on how to interpret them. The Education and Outreach Working Group http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO has done some more work on this,and may have more useful documentation. Like Tina, I think that it is worth looking into the possibilities for providing access to your work in an accessible format. The free HiCaption tool has been translated into spanish, there is MAGPie, and it is not terribly hard to do basic captioning and subtitling (although as Joe Clark's long experience shows, it is harder to do it *well*). After all, presumably the major goal is that people have access to the information, and the fact that you gave a presentation is nowhere near as interesting to a person with disabilities as knowing what you actually said. (I understand also the time constraints. I must have several hundred presentations on accessibility, but very few of them have been recorded in an accessible format. But then, very few of them have been recorded at all.) cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile Fundacion Sidar charles@sidar.org +61 409 134 136 http://www.sidar.org
Received on Saturday, 28 May 2005 19:01:43 UTC