- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 18:38:17 +0100
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
On 23/07/2020 18:37, Matthew Kreiling wrote: > I hate it as a developer, but as an assessor of WCAG compliance, I am > unsure how to treat the content within the player. Sometimes it is > static, sometimes it is animations accompanied by audio with optional > closed captions, and sometimes there are buttons to interact with it. I'd say assess every permutation in its own right as web content. Just static content? Check for the usual suspects like whether or not the structure is correctly conveyed, contrast, use of colour, headings/labels making sense, etc. Animation with audio? Synchronised media (assuming here that the audio on its own would not make sense if not in conjunction with the animation - otherwise yeah, we have that other side discussion about "synchronised" media or not, which to give more context at the time was specifically about video files). There are buttons to interact? Check as normal you wouldn normal web content again? And if these buttons are there while there's *also* audio and video/animation, evaluate *that* part as synchronised media, but the buttons as normal interactive web content. Long-winded way of saying: from what you're describing, there's no "one size fits all" way of looking at these slides as a whole. Treat them/evaluate them on a case by case basis based on their content? Unless I'm misunderstanding the core point here. P -- Patrick H. Lauke https://www.splintered.co.uk/ | https://github.com/patrickhlauke https://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | https://www.deviantart.com/redux twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Friday, 24 July 2020 17:38:32 UTC